off-stage right

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Regional - the word

David Dower at the New Play Blog (Is "Regional" A Pejorative Term?) examines my post, Why I hate REGIONAL theatre, which was about the word "REGIONAL" and some of the negativity attached to the word within the theatre community. David suggests I embrace my inner regional-ness (although I think we are more on the same page than David's post implies).

As someone who USED to work in New York and similar to David, I chose to leave the City so I could have a certain kind of life I couldn't get in New York (have a yard, be able to garden, and live near New York but not in it). I also wanted to see more clearly the impact of the work I was doing. I started out in my career in Texas working in regional theatres while going to school and then worked in North Carolina as an Outreach Director for a multi-arts organization, so I wanted to create great work like I did for 10 years in NYC, but be able to know the folks that were in the audience and my community more intimately.

In my post, I was lamenting that the term "regional" has become "pejorative" to many in the industry – especially the New York marketplace (which does consider itself center) – and that as David himself points out, in a really wonderful way (love the term) that some theatres are acting as "satellites" to several centers.

As I said late in the post to MANY (not myself) the word "regional….has come to mean something less than … agents don't want their clients doing 'regional' theatre. But in reality isn't most of what is being done in New York on commercial stages coming directly through the nurturing and development of these so-called 'lesser' regions… "

This is why I now find myself cringing when the word is used. I hear the negativity or worse the self-depreciation that is often underlying. I have been surprised by who I have heard this from including often the folks who work at regional theatres. This wasn't the intention of most of the artists who built these theatres from the ground up in communities across the country as the quotes in my post from Joe Dowling, who was quoting Tyrone Guthrie stated and as David Dower reiterated beautifully when he said…

I think what people are reacting to, fundamentally, in this call to re-regionalize the regional theater, is a sense that many regional theaters, those which established the movement and those which followed to sustain and build on it, have somehow become more satellites than regions. That they are, as Jodi implies and many others assert directly, now orbiting the New York marketplace like moons, reflecting its heat but generating none of their own. I hear from artists, ensembles, and small producers all over the country (including that micro-region: Manhattan) that they feel we're in a period where, to paraphrase one of the responders at the Humana Convening, "we're shipping the same ten plays around the country and every theater's season looks more alike than distinct." This sentiment is particularly acute among new play practitioners, whether playwrights, play labs, ensembles, or new play producers. Of course this is overly general. And in the earlier post I started to try to spotlight examples where different models and artistic priorities hold sway. But there's no denying it's a widely held and frequently expressed frustration.

I would add that unfortunately the economics of producing have added to this homogenized programming at many theatres. Certainly co-productions have become a fiscal life-saver for many companies and for some a necessity, but when a large group of theatres are working together to present a show, naturally their seasons, slowly start to look like each others. (Before anyone thinks I am against working together – I am not, I actually think co-productions have much value beyond an assumed expense savings and should be looked at first for those values).

As I stated in my post, I celebrate the work David was talking about in his post Putting the Regional back in Regional Theatre. I think it is wonderful when local artists are championed, even if they have moved on to other areas. Without regional theatres, there would a drastic decrease in new work and we would eventually have no audiences for theatre. The later can't be valued enough to the entire art form. If you don't ever experience theatre you won't miss it, and without audiences there isn't any theatre, just rehearsals. Most of the amazing work being done in theatre – on stage and off - isn't happening in New York (or London – but let's not even go there) which is why I don't like that the word is used by some in an unfavorable way or the implication that there is a center for others to revolve around. The argument could be stated perhaps in the terms of nonprofit vs. commercial theatre but as David pointed out the negativity does sometime emanate from New York regional theatres – the majority of which never use the word.

I also pointed out our transitory society in my post to illustrate how a theatre can have a lasting and larger impact. David brings up an interesting point that theatre-makers have long been living this life. Unfortunately with the loss of many (the majority) resident companies across the nation, it has created as David states, "the annual march on New York that fans out from the graduation ceremony of nearly every theater training program in the country."

I can agree with David that in definition of the word regional doesn't demand a center.

…the term doesn't so much assume or require there to be a center. If we were talking about satellite theaters, I'd be more convinced there's an implied center of greater importance than its off-shoots. Think of regions more like segments of the brain, "regions" of the brain, and you're closer to the way I have always felt about the term. It takes all of these regions, healthy, communicating well, firing on all cylinders to reach the full capacity of the human body.

However, I wasn't talking about the definition as much as how the word is used by others and the resulting impact of the word. Similarly I think theatre is a great tool for community building, but the word "community" in context with theatre implies non-professional.

I do believe that many people have had a part in some of the negative connotations associated with the word. Perhaps David it is right that it is "self-inflicted." But I would assert that whether there is a center or not, there are some other factors at play in the friction around the word – all surrounding the future life of work whether through publication, other regional productions (including New York) not the organization's work within its community. The factors include: (1) a renewed pride from theatres about creating new work or new interpretations of classic outside of New York, (2) the increasing demand for credit for that work, (3) the lines between commercial and nonprofit theatre being more blurred that ever before, and (4) an increased dependence/pressure for commercial producers (and even New York nonprofits) for regional nonprofit theatres to develop work before it comes to New York. When it comes to this future life for work, I think those who were there in the beginning should be championed!

Most importantly, I think there are so many theatres out there doing so much great work in their local communities/regions that no one should diminish the impact they have locally, nationally and in many cases globally, because of another.

Hopefully all theatres will re-regionalizing (if they need to) to serve its audiences, community and "act locally, think globally," -- a brief summary of David definition and what I have been championing in this blog since the day I started writing it, I just refer to it in terms of mission and community. Post after post, I have said this is key to survival and future sustainability, but I am not sure it will change the negative associations with the word "regional" by others.

So David as you ask – personally, I embrace my regional-ness - as you defined it, however, I still hate the fact that, to many folks out there "regional" still has other meanings that aren't so positive – and I refuse to accept those implications for the theatres I know are making a huge impact on the American theatre, but you are right about us all being on the "bus" together whether the bus is the A Train, a bus, or Metro North.

So from one former New Yorker to another, thanks for the conversation!

Labels: ,

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home