tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post113708286769841683..comments2024-02-27T16:59:54.089-05:00Comments on (The New) Theatre Ideas: Does Size Matter?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post-1137193356117646472006-01-13T18:02:00.000-05:002006-01-13T18:02:00.000-05:00Thoughts on Foreman's 100 people every night for w...Thoughts on Foreman's 100 people every night for weeks and weeks.<BR/><BR/>1. Foreman has a community of spectators that he has earned after doing theatre for roughly 30 years in NYC. Also he was a darling of the avant garde NY scene who has been written about ad naseum in every theatrical journal worthy of mention.<BR/><BR/>2. Had Foreman attempted to set himself up in any other city in America, he wouldn't have the same amount of spectators/audience. Even in a progressive college town environment like say, Yale, the lines would shorten very quickly.<BR/><BR/>My point being that you can't hold up the example of Foreman in NYC and say to other artists in other cities, "see you can suceed at making 'elitist art' and making it work."<BR/><BR/>Artists like Foreman, Wilson, Lee Breuer, LePage... to say that their level achievement is possible for a theatrical artist is like saying anyone can become president of the US, or anyone can win the lottery. All these guys were either in the right place at the right time (i.e. the 60's) or the are products of better funded artistic nationalities.<BR/><BR/>Foreman himself has stated that a young artist starting in theater today can't achieve the same sort of following he himself has.<BR/><BR/>It is not as simple as saying that "he is doing something right."Devilvethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01425758108288436683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post-1137101318519418682006-01-12T16:28:00.000-05:002006-01-12T16:28:00.000-05:00"I don't approve of Foreman's call for an "elitist..."I don't approve of Foreman's call for an "elitist" theatre, because it seems to be the theatrical equivalent of a secret society with codes known by only the initiated few. "<BR/><BR/>I think that Foreman is a huge provocateur and his statement is much more layered than the statement itself. I hear a great deal of sarcasm in that statement. And also , I think there is a certain acceptance of the truth in his saying that. He aknowledges that the only way for theatre artists to truly speak their truth and be honest about what they are doing is to accept that most of the time we do preach to the converted. That our audience is often each other ( I mean look at our blog discussions : it's us with us... wouldn't you love to hear some non theatre practitionners or critics chime in here ?) and that until we accept that we can't really free up the work and let it be what it should be. <BR/>I don't really hear Foreman being an elitist. I hear him stating the truth about our art form. <BR/><BR/>My work has stalled in the last few months as I am trying to figure out who I am talking to in my plays and why...DLhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11971226704327883196noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post-1137096849889496262006-01-12T15:14:00.000-05:002006-01-12T15:14:00.000-05:00Good point, George. I think there is a lot to lea...Good point, George. I think there is a lot to learn from what Foreman does. First, he produces his own work, so he has artistic control. Second, he produces work regularly -- and if I'm not mistaken, doesn't he occasionally revive old work? Third, he has offers a consistent experience -- if you go to a Foreman production, you know you're not going to get "The Music Man." As a result, he has created a <I>community</I> [ding! ding! ding!] around his theatre that is sufficient to support his work without, I suspect, a whole lot of newspaper and TV ads and mass mailings. To me, that's the ideal. Insular? Not to those in the ocmmunity. To those who arent' in the know, Foreman tends to be a bit baffling. They can be initiated, but they need some space.Scott Waltershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04177922467901223790noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post-1137096524698601712006-01-12T15:08:00.000-05:002006-01-12T15:08:00.000-05:00I really think it's the posters.Foreman is a brand...I really think it's the posters.<BR/><BR/>Foreman is a brand in NYC.<BR/><BR/>That had completely escaped me.<BR/><BR/>I think my point just hit George's tastes smack dab in the middle with the Foreman posters.Freemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01183078884824734105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post-1137093989475386582006-01-12T14:26:00.000-05:002006-01-12T14:26:00.000-05:00Well, just to add my two cents here (and to finish...Well, just to add my two cents here (and to finish talking about Foreman, because I'd like to move on myself), I'll just point out an odd contradiction, Scott, in your post and assert that there is an audience for this so-called "elitist" art. You write:<BR/><BR/>"So on the one hand, I don't approve of Foreman's call for an 'elitist' theatre, because it seems to be the theatrical equivalent of a secret society with codes known by only the initiated few. On the other, I think that the theatre thrives by having a personal relationship with the audience, which means having smaller audiences.<BR/><BR/>"So I'd prefer to have a small audience in the theatre, and a long line of people wanting to get into the theatre!"<BR/><BR/>Although you characterize Foreman's theater as "a secret society known only by the initiated few," those few are perhaps more numerous than you think. The Ontological, every year, lets 100 people into its space for each of its performances, four per week, and can successfully sell out a six-month run: ironically, you've got your small audiences and your long lines for a theater that seems insular to you. Perhaps it's not as insular as we all think. If they went once and never returned, it might be chalked up to mere curiosity, but something in these plays has spoken to these audiences year after year, and they're still quite young: many people in his audience weren't even born when Foreman started his theater. He must be doing something right.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post-1137087463716678752006-01-12T12:37:00.000-05:002006-01-12T12:37:00.000-05:00well said Matt. Yes, I think we are, in our own wa...well said Matt. Yes, I think we are, in our own way, moving towards a shared view. The fruits of conversation and collaboration!MattJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15024391912705232207noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post-1137086508745225232006-01-12T12:21:00.000-05:002006-01-12T12:21:00.000-05:00There's a great deal of what you've said that is i...There's a great deal of what you've said that is indisputable, Scott. And I think I recognize that we're all slowly moving towards something of a shared view here. <BR/><BR/>It's simply practical and true that there is no way that a play, given a short run, can have the same audience that even a really bad TV show has on Thursday nights. And it's also true that certain plays communicate more effectively to an intimate audience. Doing certain plays in the middle of Madison Square Garden might be, shall we say, ineffective?<BR/><BR/>I measure this a successful broadening of the audience as interested young people who are not practioners, but fans. The way that you have crowds of college students who love independent music or go see concerts on their Friday nights? We need to compare theater to itself...it's current state. While Broadway is making money, it's going about it by doing more and more that is instantly recognizable to its audience: films, TV, stars of films.<BR/><BR/>You've noted that instead of one play getting word of mouth, that one theatre should have word of mouth. What I've been suggesting is that you multiply that equation by the entire theatrical world. What if we created word of mouth, of buzz, for theatre as something that you SHOULD be seeing. <BR/><BR/>Wine has, over the last twenty years, moved to the center of the conciousness of the post-boomer generation. Wine is complex, difficult, expensive. But you can't spit without hitting someone who knows whether or not they like Cabernet or Pinot in NYC, or that ordering White Zin is like throwing up on your date's lap.<BR/><BR/>How did this happen? Education, word of mouth, a dedicated industry. <BR/><BR/>This is why I talk so often about Marketing. Not because I want anyone to compromise their work. I don't want everyone to start making White Zinfandel because it seems to sell well. I want the mainstream to get excited about the entire "Wine" industry.<BR/><BR/>I will now finally put this extended Metaphor to rest. It is exhausted.Freemanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01183078884824734105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16876687.post-1137085259192562422006-01-12T12:00:00.000-05:002006-01-12T12:00:00.000-05:00"So I'd prefer to have a small audience in the the..."So I'd prefer to have a small audience in the theatre, and a long line of people wanting to get into the theatre!"<BR/><BR/>I agree. And since I agree, I worry we are defining "audience" differently. An observation Freeman made a week ago or so (although I would also add longer runs into that mix). <BR/><BR/>When I say I want a "larger" audience, one which has been built, I do not necessarily mean I want tons of people physically in the theatre all the time in gigantic auditoriums.<BR/><BR/>The way I think about it, I imagine a larger theatre audience having significant repercussions on artists and theaters. Where there are more professional actors, directors, designers, and playwrights in the country; more regional theatres, and at least one in every city and maybe even town; more educational focus on the theatre, etc.<BR/><BR/>The result of the larger audience is a support for the form and the creation of it, so that we, and our children, and our's children's children would be able to firmly choose a life in the theatre.<BR/><BR/>That's one side, the other side is that more people would be experiencing the work. In line with a comment I posted on Freeman's blog when I said we would be "creating an audience for our art." Lots more to say here of course but I'll leave it at that for now... but if we can't get past these ideas we'll never start putting forth a newer approach as I proposed in my post, a focus on new plays...MattJhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15024391912705232207noreply@blogger.com