Circle Circle dot dot.
Like it ir not, you're going to hear alot from this angry young theatre company. Angry? Fuck yes.
BTW, if you don't like the F-bomb don't see The Breakup Breakdown. If you've ever broken up (and who hasn't?) then you owe it to yourself to see this. It will be fucking cathartic, y'all.
The show has everything including marital aids, guitars, angry lesbians, cat piss.. Too much? Probably but go, you'll like it.
Standouts include Jacque Wilke as a long suffering sammich getter, Soroya Rowley as that woman you become after breaking up, and Sammantha Gin as the crazy chick you've all dated once (or more if you need help). PS Sam Ginn can beat box better than anyone.
The guys were pretty darn good too; something for everyone including those who like rubenesque men in diapers. I'm just going to leave it at that see this show and figure it out for yourself.
If Circle Circle dot dot could find a venue with 150+ seats and a bar, this show would run forever. But as it stands, The Breakup Breakdown has to close on July 10th so do yourself a cathartic favor and see this fucker.
More info. at www.circle2dot2.com.
June 30, 2011
June 21, 2011
Arts Marketing
I just read an article about a Theatre Communication Group conference on arts marketing and it raised all kinds of emotions. In the article, someone commented that playwrights were complaining that marketers don't know how to market their plays. And marketing directors were complaining that playwrights don't know enough about marketing to tell them what to do.
Having been both a marketing director and a playwright, I think I have as true a perspective on the problem as anyone. Both parties are right. In my experience, arts organizations choose products without consulting the marketing department and then complain when sales figures are low.
As one friend in the business once said, "When a play sells well, it's an artistic success and when it doesn't sell well, it's a marketing failure."
Artists and arts managers should remember that in the for profit world, the product originates in the marketing department. Marketers decide what people want and then help create a product to sell to these people. Arts organizations don't often ask their audiences what they want, unless we're talking about Broadway - and there's a reason that ticket prices are high on Broadway: people want to see the shows.
Arts organizations are encouraged to take risks and expand their audiences' horizons by presenting work that is new, that challenges the status quo and makes people feel and think. That is good art. The problem with good art is that people don't like it as much as good artistic product. The fact about nonprofit theatre audiences is that they don't know nearly as much about theatre as the people running them. This is not a bad thing.
I worked at a theatre in San DIego that got a huge grant to study audience demographics in the service of expanding audiences and especially minority audiences. It is no secret that the majority of theatre goers at that time were older, well-educated, well-to-to white people. This years-long study supported African American plays, Latino plays and traditional plays and tried to integrate audiences to all of them. The results were interesting.
Generally, Latinos supported Latino plays; African Americans supported African American plays and Whites went to everything. So the audience, after the years-long study, turned out to be predominantly an older, whiter, well educated and well-to-do audience but one, we learned, who appreciated more types of plays than we thought.
The same crowd that marketing directors at theatres have been marketing to for years. With limited budgets for marketing (something I have never understood), marketing directors have to market to this demographic primarily.
I am not advocating for marketing directors to dictate to playwrights. People engaged in this activity are on TV and in film and playwrights (and theatres and audiences) want something different. I am advocating for marketing directors and artistic directors to communicate.
Remember, artistic people, that the marketing department manages the only people who interact with customers who like and dislike the product. Remember, marketing people, that artists have to develop seasons of thoughtful, thought-provoking and powerful art.
Of course, all you really have to do, playwrights, is look at what the large and medium theatres are doing to see what they want and what they want is brand new but proven thought-provoking art. The fact that playwrights are even in theatres in the first place is a miracle. The fact that they are complaining about this miracle is heart-breaking.
My goal is to wright a Tony Award winning play and, during my acceptance speech say, "To the people who chose plays: know that there are still a number of plays with my name on them in your stacks of unread plays. The cost of doing these plays just went up. Also know this: in support of the play writing community, I will submit the rest of my plays under pseudonyms so you will have to read them all to find mine. During that process I know you will find other voices as good as, or better than, mine. Thank you."
Too bitter?
Having been both a marketing director and a playwright, I think I have as true a perspective on the problem as anyone. Both parties are right. In my experience, arts organizations choose products without consulting the marketing department and then complain when sales figures are low.
As one friend in the business once said, "When a play sells well, it's an artistic success and when it doesn't sell well, it's a marketing failure."
Artists and arts managers should remember that in the for profit world, the product originates in the marketing department. Marketers decide what people want and then help create a product to sell to these people. Arts organizations don't often ask their audiences what they want, unless we're talking about Broadway - and there's a reason that ticket prices are high on Broadway: people want to see the shows.
Arts organizations are encouraged to take risks and expand their audiences' horizons by presenting work that is new, that challenges the status quo and makes people feel and think. That is good art. The problem with good art is that people don't like it as much as good artistic product. The fact about nonprofit theatre audiences is that they don't know nearly as much about theatre as the people running them. This is not a bad thing.
I worked at a theatre in San DIego that got a huge grant to study audience demographics in the service of expanding audiences and especially minority audiences. It is no secret that the majority of theatre goers at that time were older, well-educated, well-to-to white people. This years-long study supported African American plays, Latino plays and traditional plays and tried to integrate audiences to all of them. The results were interesting.
Generally, Latinos supported Latino plays; African Americans supported African American plays and Whites went to everything. So the audience, after the years-long study, turned out to be predominantly an older, whiter, well educated and well-to-do audience but one, we learned, who appreciated more types of plays than we thought.
The same crowd that marketing directors at theatres have been marketing to for years. With limited budgets for marketing (something I have never understood), marketing directors have to market to this demographic primarily.
I am not advocating for marketing directors to dictate to playwrights. People engaged in this activity are on TV and in film and playwrights (and theatres and audiences) want something different. I am advocating for marketing directors and artistic directors to communicate.
Remember, artistic people, that the marketing department manages the only people who interact with customers who like and dislike the product. Remember, marketing people, that artists have to develop seasons of thoughtful, thought-provoking and powerful art.
Of course, all you really have to do, playwrights, is look at what the large and medium theatres are doing to see what they want and what they want is brand new but proven thought-provoking art. The fact that playwrights are even in theatres in the first place is a miracle. The fact that they are complaining about this miracle is heart-breaking.
My goal is to wright a Tony Award winning play and, during my acceptance speech say, "To the people who chose plays: know that there are still a number of plays with my name on them in your stacks of unread plays. The cost of doing these plays just went up. Also know this: in support of the play writing community, I will submit the rest of my plays under pseudonyms so you will have to read them all to find mine. During that process I know you will find other voices as good as, or better than, mine. Thank you."
Too bitter?
June 15, 2011
June 13, 2011
I beg to differ, for the first time
I know how dangerous it is to disagree with reviewers and especially headline writers - as they're sometimes all we have. But, they're all we have and I don't think they saw the same show I performed in...
So here's my first ever review of the review for "Swimming in the Shallows". There's a link below to read the review as written but first a few comments:
"...but during one’s experience of the play, deeper thoughts do not occur: We are, after all, swimming in the shallows with five ridiculously fraught humans"
Actually, I believe the play is about the beginning, middle and end of relationships and how consumerism is ruining relationships. So, if new love, marriage, divorce and paring down ones possessions are shallow - guilty!
"...perhaps because the characters’ problems are so common and trivial and their neuroses so mild."
See my comments above.
"Nonetheless, the vigor and attractive nature of artistic director Carla Nell’s acting company is laudable."
Thank you for the laudanum.
"Barb has a garage sale and lightens her load further by getting rid of her clueless husband, Bob (Kevin Six)."
This is the best piece of writing in the whole review.
Read the whole thing here
So here's my first ever review of the review for "Swimming in the Shallows". There's a link below to read the review as written but first a few comments:
"InnerMission's Swimming in the Shallows drowns in its own ingratiating humor"
Harsh. Much more harsh than the review. Do keep reading."...but during one’s experience of the play, deeper thoughts do not occur: We are, after all, swimming in the shallows with five ridiculously fraught humans"
Actually, I believe the play is about the beginning, middle and end of relationships and how consumerism is ruining relationships. So, if new love, marriage, divorce and paring down ones possessions are shallow - guilty!
"...perhaps because the characters’ problems are so common and trivial and their neuroses so mild."
See my comments above.
"Nonetheless, the vigor and attractive nature of artistic director Carla Nell’s acting company is laudable."
Thank you for the laudanum.
"Barb has a garage sale and lightens her load further by getting rid of her clueless husband, Bob (Kevin Six)."
This is the best piece of writing in the whole review.
Read the whole thing here
June 9, 2011
Swimming in the Shallows review:
"Six is boyishly charming as Bob, Barb’s confused and slightly befuddled (if not too horrifically sad) husband. I really loved that fact that he wore a t-shirt that said “Bob” the entire production. Barb’s obsessive talk of “Bob” objectified him and the t-shirt topped it off."
-Paola Hornbuckle, Arts N Fashion Magazine
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)