Sunday, January 22, 2006
Dramatis Personae
I'm thinking more about the Cast of Characters for this Omnibus...there needs to be a Who's Who in the Cast in the back because the sheer number of people mentioned in the Durfee Transcripts is making me confused. Who was Patty? How long was James Bundy there? What about folks not in LA (and not part of my experiece of the company)?
Maybe also a list of past administrators, even Boards?
I just read the individual interviews of a couple of people I've never met: Anne Beresford Clark and David Reifel. Ann had an interesting comment about the "non-petty" nature of arguments in the company. In her experience, there were almost never turf fights or such--any argument was likely to concern methods..."Things would be better if we did it THIS way, not THAT," for example. I have to say that turf and/or hierarchy is usually absent from the dealings I've had with Cornerstone. It's there, but very much in the background.
David actually says (though not, I think, in response to Anne) that those conflicts were there but buried deep. Sonja brought this out in her book: that was one of the reasons he left. I think this is also linked to a perception that maybe the company got good at smoothing things over, "ignoring the warts" is how he put it. Again, as in my last post, the tension between accepting something the community is putting out as a value and challenging it.
There is a constant thread in the company's past: gay men in small town America. It's a deep subject...Cornerstone's been looking at it 20 years before Ang Lee got to it. There's a entire story right there...a whole article all by itself, if not a book. I've heard and read stories from pretty much all of the early company members who are gay: what it's like to walk into a real cowboy bar, to deal with a religious group, etc. Interesting: nothing from the women's perspective, straight or gay. David mentions Paulina at the end of WINTER'S TALE...but that's it.
One key line from David, "It seemed like the show was only about what everybody could agree to have it about."
Maybe also a list of past administrators, even Boards?
I just read the individual interviews of a couple of people I've never met: Anne Beresford Clark and David Reifel. Ann had an interesting comment about the "non-petty" nature of arguments in the company. In her experience, there were almost never turf fights or such--any argument was likely to concern methods..."Things would be better if we did it THIS way, not THAT," for example. I have to say that turf and/or hierarchy is usually absent from the dealings I've had with Cornerstone. It's there, but very much in the background.
David actually says (though not, I think, in response to Anne) that those conflicts were there but buried deep. Sonja brought this out in her book: that was one of the reasons he left. I think this is also linked to a perception that maybe the company got good at smoothing things over, "ignoring the warts" is how he put it. Again, as in my last post, the tension between accepting something the community is putting out as a value and challenging it.
There is a constant thread in the company's past: gay men in small town America. It's a deep subject...Cornerstone's been looking at it 20 years before Ang Lee got to it. There's a entire story right there...a whole article all by itself, if not a book. I've heard and read stories from pretty much all of the early company members who are gay: what it's like to walk into a real cowboy bar, to deal with a religious group, etc. Interesting: nothing from the women's perspective, straight or gay. David mentions Paulina at the end of WINTER'S TALE...but that's it.
One key line from David, "It seemed like the show was only about what everybody could agree to have it about."
Sunday, January 15, 2006
Ancient disks and artistic choices...
I got an email from Alison this week saying that Ben just found some old computer disks with scripts from 3 Sisters, Pier, Rent, Winter's Tale, Toy Truck, and Video Store on them. Excellent news as it will save some costs in transcription.
The disks for the Durfee transcripts also turned up! This is great news...I am still piling through them. I think I'm going to make a set for myself at some point at Kinko's. I was thinking of making two and giving one to Michael John Garces, incoming AD. He'd find them interesting, I think. That whole "collective voice" of the founders and early fellow travelers is most instructive.
This week one of the things I was pondering is the decision to edit or change a show based on community standards. There's an interesting conflict in GOOD PERSON OF LONG CREEK that has an echo in ROMEO AND JULIET. In each case, the company responded differently...the difference is illustrative of a really critical aspect of Cornerstone's aesthetic and political policy.
In Long Creek, OR., the community was notably divided between the folks who went to church on Sunday and the folks who went to the bar on Saturday. The play includes an unwed mother, which was offensive to the church-goers...the company made adjustments and compromises to address the concerns of that side of the community.
Port Gibson, MI., hadn't seen a black man kiss a white woman onstage...when that happened in ROMEO AND JULIET rehearsals, Bill Rauch was invited to lunch by one of the ladies in the "Mint Julep Belles" and told, "They just can't kiss."
So do you censor yourself, or is that the wrong attitude? Is the question more about responding to the community and learning about their perspective?
The kiss is not incidental to the plot, so in R&J both the moral and the dramturgical arguments in favor of the kiss made it inevitable...but I guess in Oregon the moral issue was there, but the dramaturgical arguments were less important.
It seems to me that the most noted example of negotiations with a community, the inclusion of a gay muslim chatacter in LONG BRIDGE, is the latest of a hundred such. That topic in itself would be a fascinating piece for the Omnibus...when do you hold the line? When do you compromise?
Got to run down a few articles from this time...I think they're in the files...Newsweek, WSJ, People and NY Times...and a Today show appearance?
Also, there's mention of something called the "Scatter Project," where company members separated and went back to communities...first time I've heard of that.
The disks for the Durfee transcripts also turned up! This is great news...I am still piling through them. I think I'm going to make a set for myself at some point at Kinko's. I was thinking of making two and giving one to Michael John Garces, incoming AD. He'd find them interesting, I think. That whole "collective voice" of the founders and early fellow travelers is most instructive.
This week one of the things I was pondering is the decision to edit or change a show based on community standards. There's an interesting conflict in GOOD PERSON OF LONG CREEK that has an echo in ROMEO AND JULIET. In each case, the company responded differently...the difference is illustrative of a really critical aspect of Cornerstone's aesthetic and political policy.
In Long Creek, OR., the community was notably divided between the folks who went to church on Sunday and the folks who went to the bar on Saturday. The play includes an unwed mother, which was offensive to the church-goers...the company made adjustments and compromises to address the concerns of that side of the community.
Port Gibson, MI., hadn't seen a black man kiss a white woman onstage...when that happened in ROMEO AND JULIET rehearsals, Bill Rauch was invited to lunch by one of the ladies in the "Mint Julep Belles" and told, "They just can't kiss."
So do you censor yourself, or is that the wrong attitude? Is the question more about responding to the community and learning about their perspective?
The kiss is not incidental to the plot, so in R&J both the moral and the dramturgical arguments in favor of the kiss made it inevitable...but I guess in Oregon the moral issue was there, but the dramaturgical arguments were less important.
It seems to me that the most noted example of negotiations with a community, the inclusion of a gay muslim chatacter in LONG BRIDGE, is the latest of a hundred such. That topic in itself would be a fascinating piece for the Omnibus...when do you hold the line? When do you compromise?
Got to run down a few articles from this time...I think they're in the files...Newsweek, WSJ, People and NY Times...and a Today show appearance?
Also, there's mention of something called the "Scatter Project," where company members separated and went back to communities...first time I've heard of that.
