Falls Church News-Press Online: The biggest citizen concern to arise so far from recent public input sessions on the plans for the new George Mason High School focus on what the new theater/auditorium space there is going to be like. Unlike the current high school’s space, the new plan would be to remove the “fly” loft and system that many consider vital for theatrical productions, and more than a few parents and citizens are not happy.
11 comments:
I understand why people would be upset that the school no longer has a fly system and why why a fly system could be considered dangerous. Without proper supervision and training, students could get hurt using the system. Since many high school drama teachers art primarily acting teachers, them may not be able to properly instruct students to use the equipment. I think the article is more interesting as an example of how people explain technical theater to non theater people. The article sites Wikipedia to explain what a fly system is and the article never says if it would be a counterweight system or a help one. As the article states, the depending on how the building is designed, it may not be possible for the theater to have a fly systems, but the article never mentions why. Also, the article doesn’t say that what USITT provides is just standards and common practices rather the law or regulation.
I understand the outrage about the removal of the fly system at George Mason High School, but on the other hand, many high school theaters don’t have fly systems to have taken away. So, this seems like a good opportunity to recognizes and appreciate our privileges. However, George Mason High School is the largest performing arts space, with the most accommodations in the area. So, it seems to make more sense to preserve the features of the space in their new plan for that reason.
Normally I’d be more indifferent towards the situation and say it’s just a high school, they can make do without those resources like most other high schools do, but they are in a position of artistic importance in their community, and to limit the school then limits every other production and company that utilizes that space. It’s one thing to ask a high school to use rolling sets and other substitutions, but a fly system is the industry standard for professional transitions, and I can see why the community would like to maintain that.
I disagree wholeheartedly that a fly system is a necessary part of a theatre. My high school didn’t have any way to rig anything, and we still did a wide array of shows, including large musicals. Even so, there are quite a few valid points made in the article. I guess the more I think about it, the more I realize I don’t have enough information here to actually evaluate whether or not the space would be actually deficient without a fly system. How many people does the venue seat? What sort of funding would be allocated to producing shows? Would there be enough staff to adequately manage the venue and any rentals that might come through? Is the architectural issue of not having the vertical space allocated for a fly system due to code/zoning restrictions? It seems like the people lobbying for a fly system in the new space just want a venue that is at least as good as what they had before, which doesn’t seem like too much to ask.
I understand that the people who use this theatre and are used to the fly upset that they will no longer have that resource to be used in their shows. I think there were some good points made in this article as to why they should be able to have their fly system such as the educational purposes of having all of the resources available to express their creativity and the fact that it is the biggest meeting and performance space in the area. However, I completely disagree that a fly system is necessary to create full-scale theatre. There are so many high schools and professional theatres in the country and the world without a fly system and are producing theatre at the same level artistically as those companies with fly systems. I also think there is not enough information in the article about the past history of the productions, the true necessity of the fly system, and the reasons why the fly system is not possible.
When I first saw this article I was expecting the decision to not include a fly space to be due to safety concerns, which is fair. I do think it seems odd to be building a new facility and not include a fly system, but I understand not wanting that much vertical space. If they have a large amount of backstage space, they could have lots of wagons and other on the ground scenery, and they can also use olio/ roll drops to still have scenery in the air. In my highschool we did have access to a proscenium theater with a fly system (though our school technically didn't own it even though it was in the building... it was weird), but we also had a smaller theater with no fly system. I did two projects that involved rigging in the smaller theater, and those projects were a lot more interesting and I learned more from doing them than I did from any of the times I just hung a drop in the larger theater. Thinking back on it, I don’t think we ever actually flew any hard scenery anyway, it was all just softgoods, and those mostly stayed on the line sets they were on and just came in and out. I can only think of one time I reweighted for anything other than an electric. In short, I think you can provide plenty of interesting opportunities for students even if you don’t have a fly system.
While it seems strange that a school that had a fly system would build a new theatre without one, I can't help but read the tone of this article as a bit pretentious. I never even went backstage in a theatre with a fly system until this September when I started at CMU. My middle school had a cafetorium, like theirs, yet we did not even have a theatre program in the first place. My high school had an auditorium with no fly system, com system, a shop or an actual green room. To say that the IB students would be deprived of their academic experience by not having a fly system is being a bit dramatic. If I could make it to a theatre school - they can too. I think fly systems are extremely cool and I'm very excited to finally be able to work in a theatre that has one, but I definitely do not think they are necessary for a high school setting. This is mostly due to funding that could be used elsewhere, necessity, and safety. You do not need a fly system to put on good productions. I understand why they are upset though - if I had a fly system at my school, and then was told we were getting a brand new theatre, and then was told that the new one would not have a fly system - I would be mad too.
To judge if a theater is "fully-functioning" by its equipment is always a bad idea to me. In most cases I would argue that fly system is just one of the solutions to have scenes changed during a performance. It is an old way to do it, sometimes best, but not necessarily. There are so many forms of theater other than proscenium, so why we stick to it? For the case is built for institutional purpose, I hope that students will still be trained to operate the traditional fly system. It might be a great opportunity to stimulate innovative ideas among the users in the future. Honestly I always had better time building for a black box theater than a proscenium one. I am a bit upset seeing people put fly system and proscenium theater in front of other forms.
I went to a recently built high school and in its construction phases the construction team had similar problems meeting the budgetary needs of the school and the needs of the school’s bustling theatre program. Miscommunications resulted in an unsafe scene shop without proper ventilation for sawdust that caused the entire space to be shut down for over 4 months just a few years later due to safety concerns about sawdust getting into the schools electrical systems right next door which could have been catastrophic. Luckily we were able to use a nearby carpentry shop in the evenings. Scenarios like these could have been avoided with proper communication and the hiring of a theatre consultant. A fly system is a less severe consequence of the absence of proper collaboration, though important nonetheless. In a school that strives to provide its students with a comprehensive theatre education I think a fly system should be a must in a new building (especially ones in which it can be afforded like in this situation where they are already spending such a large sum of money). The opportunity in high school to explore theatrical passion in a well equipped space, which cannot be present without the opportunities and educational experiences that come with a fly system, may become even more integral to a students theatre education in 15 years and the construction team will probably not have the opportunity then the rethink, other than to regret this decision.
I think that this article is actually a bit limiting in what it considers the capability of students and theatre practicioners to realize their designs without fly systems. A counterweight rigging system and subsequent fly space are only one of the elements which make a theater, and i honsetly don't know if I disagree with the basic premis that countwerweight rigging systems are dangerous to put into high schools. Certainly the large majority of us here at Carnegie Mellon have had these systems in our high schools or have had experience with them outside of school, but how many of us also had to learn on the fly, as it were, without supervision, possibly in situations that could have lead to accidents? I'm not necessarily suggesting that there is theatre supervisors and teachers are not trainging people properly on these systems, but that at certain points, training and supervision become afterthoughts. I also kind of object to the idea that the International Bachalaureate theatre students need a fly system. As a recipient of the IB Theatre Certificate, my school only had a black box theatre, and my final projects in that class barely even used that space. To say that those students need this system is fairly limiting, actually.
It is typical to see budgetary cuts in government-funded projects and often time the theatre space is the first to go. My high school went through a massive renovation my junior year and not only was the project strapped for cash, but they also did not bring in the proper theatre consultants to fit the space. In fact, the first time the redesign came back to the students that stage floor was level with the audience ground. We were thankful that the project came in under budget and everything they had promised was delivered.
I can understand why the GMHS community is frustrated with the budget allocations for this project and I hope the outcome included a fully functioning theatre space. It is sad to see that school administration target the arts before any other department, but in the case of most public schools in the country, theatre is not the priority in many cases.
At my high school, we had two performance spaces and did at least one show in each of them every year. One was a full theater with fly space and full grid and everything, and the other did not. From my experience trying to design and mount shows in both those spaces, I can say that they are wildly different experiences. The small space without a fly house was hugely limiting in terms of scenery; last year we did a show where we wanted a have a tall and imposing center wall, and standing it up in the space was almost impossible due to the electrics and music shell hanging there that we couldn’t move. It was very limiting in those spaces to be unable to have any fly cues, and any shows mounted in that space were necessarily small and less tech-heavy than the ones in our larger space. My high school dealt with these problems mainly because we were able to do our large productions in the large space. To build the area’s major performance space without a fly system seems educationally, artistically, and practically limiting to me. I understand the safety concerns but it was an important part of my high school theatre education to learn about the safe operation of the fly system and I can’t imagine the main performance space in a region not having one. I hope this decision is re-evaluated.
Post a Comment