The Producer's Perspective: There are hundreds of summer theaters across this country if not thousands. They all put up similar fare: Oklahoma!, Hairspray, and a mix of the old classics and the newer fare from the past few Broadway seasons. Their job is not to do new musicals, because, as much as we might like them to, it wouldn’t be good for their business model.
6 comments:
It’s always interesting for me to read about how regional or summer stock theatres choose their season. I spent a little bit of time interning at a regional theatre, and I got to see first hand how a larger ‘name’ show compares to a new, unheard of work. I can very much understand why theatres would choose the former. Audiences want to know what their getting into, they want to feel safe and comfortable. But it’s the new or not yet popular works that really drive the evolution of theatre. And those works need an audience to survive as well. I think it’s important to introduce audiences to these works. But it’s a risky move on the part of summer stock theatres to add a new work to the season, especially since it’s already difficult for theatres to attract a regular audience. The idea of free readings or low budget stagings compared to a full blown production solves a lot of those issues though. Theatres don’t have as much at stake. I find it’s a good compromise for introducing audiences to new works.
Having a reading of a new play or musical is a great way to expose an audience to something that might not otherwise be fully produced. Perhaps equally important, as the article points out, is the benefit for the actors and directors working on the piece. I appreciate the author's wisdom on the matter: "Idle artists are like Ferraris... when someone has lost the keys." Today, when big, happy musicals are (I feel) all too prevalent, it's very important for theatre companies to put on staged readings. The other side of the coin, though, is that doing readings takes time and money away from fully produced shows. To save on these readings, companies could stage them in rehearsal spaces rather than union houses and, like the author suggests, ask for donations. I've appreciated every staged reading I've been to. For me, it's neat to hear the text read and imagine the world of the play in my head, more similar to how I would read a book. Staged readings are an important part of theatre and should not be ignored, but rather embraced.
I am so glad someone with a better understanding of the financial elements of theatre is writing this article. I feel like I have been saying this for two years! You always see the articles saying how theatre is dying, and how so many theatre's continue to close. And I am a firm believer that this is because of the status quo they cater too. I understand that that very status quo is what the subscriber prefer, but subscribers die. If you do not peak interest in your product across the generations then you will die too. You have to keep bringing forth new, relevant, engaging theatre. Millennial’s don’t care about Oklahoma! At least outside of the theatre world.
These free readings can give some bored teens something to do on a Friday night. Build an interest and instead of spending $10 on a movie, they’ll spend it on a small production. And then go off of that. People like live things, even though all movies are making us more and more addicted to instant responses, there is nothing like a live piece. People will come, make them want to.
I really like the ideas that this author has. I definitely agree that it is necessary to keep more common shows that audiences, especially the older ones who are actually going to the theatre, have their comfortable shows like Oklahoma! and Godspell. However, it is a really good idea to throw a new show or a reading of a new show in there too. That way, the subscribers (the old people) see something new that they may actually like, and new works are getting more exposure. I personally really like the way Paper Mill Playhouse formats their season. Paper Mill usually starts out with a relatively common or at least very traditional and entertaining first show for September and October. They then put on a very well known show for Christmas, since that is when they are drawing in the most crowds. In February, they usually do a straight play that is less known or a new musical that is very unknown. They then follow that with a musical that is at least relatively popular, and end the season with a known crowd pleaser that is ideally semi family friendly. I have always thought this was great because, although the less known show does not sell as well, the subscribers still come and are able to see new works that do not get much recognition.
Even though this article is from a few years ago, I still see its relevance today. As many of my classmates are getting summer stock jobs and internships, I am noticing that many theatres choose to produce classic, feel-good musicals that are well-known and well-loved. This makes sense financially but does not necessarily enlighten audiences. Some companies are implementing new works, but they are often smaller scale productions when compared to the main season. This does make sense because a show that is different and more experimental could bring in a smaller audience because it is less familiar to them. However, exposing individuals to new voices is incredibly important, and I believe CMU is an example of a location that makes a true effort to pursue that. I’m unsure if this was much of a concept in a summer stock when this article was written but I do somewhat see this at least present in certain theatres.
Even though this article is from a few years ago, I still see its relevance today. As many of my classmates are getting summer stock jobs and internships, I am noticing that many theatres choose to produce classic, feel-good musicals that are well-known and well-loved. This makes sense financially but does not necessarily enlighten audiences. Some companies are implementing new works, but they are often smaller scale productions when compared to the main season. This does make sense because a show that is different and more experimental could bring in a smaller audience because it is less familiar to them. However, exposing individuals to new voices is incredibly important, and I believe CMU is an example of a location that makes a true effort to pursue that. I’m unsure if this was much of a concept in a summer stock when this article was written but I do somewhat see this at least present in certain theatres.
Post a Comment