There was an interesting blog post that I saw tweeted out by @balttheatre, the source being a friend of mine, Cole Matson. (link to article)
The author quoted Beth Leavel's keynote at Southeastern Theatre Conference:
"All I know is that if I want to work in Chicago, I have to be in New York; if I want to work in Seattle, which is a great theatre town, I have to be in New York; if I want to work in my home town of Raleigh, I have to be in New York."
He goes on to discuss how American theatre is turning into Wal-Mart and NYC is our distribution center. Theatre schools are teaching students that if they want to work they need to go to NYC. Or at least that's what I got from it.
At least in my experience, it wasn't my school that taught me that, it was the regional theaters themselves. I trained in Seattle and we were afforded the opportunity to go to the regional theaters at least twice a year (I think it was actually more than that). My classmates and I quickly noticed that a lot of the bios had NY credits. This wasn't the case EVERY time, but it happened a lot. In the comments of the post there was an interesting discussion about how it needs to be the responsibility of the AD or MD/ED to have the vision and care enough about the artistic community to cast local talent. I agree completely, though I suggest a mix of talent from other cities (not just NYC) intertwined with local talent. This lets your audience experience a mix of local actors they love, while giving them something new to chew their teeth on.
When I was at On the Boards (OtB)in Seattle, their programming was dedicated to showcasing acts from the Northwest as well as bringing talent from around the world to Seattle audiences. Granted they were a type of performance house that supported contemporary work that pushes artistic boundaries, but their spirit was one that I think regional theatres can take a clue from.
How many times do you go to the theatre and see only actors from out of town?
Posts
