Storefront Rebellion

Jeff Awards

Click over to Time Out for my recap of last night's Non-Equity Jeff Awards and this week's ten new reviews.

Some less than fully formed thoughts on the Jeffs and the Tonys

On Friday night, I caught up with Brett Neveu's Gas for Less, which opened on the Goodman's second stage (the Owen) last weekend.

I spent much of the rest of this weekend talking with some New York theater folks about, inevitably, next week's Tony Awards (one of my weekend pals is a Tony voter).

I'm struck, all of a sudden, by the slight parallels between Gas for Less and In the Heights, the Broadway show that racked up the most Tony nominations this year.

Non-Equity Jeff noms

In my last post, I didn't make any promises about posting my thoughts on the Non-Equity Jeff nominations, but I do have some things to add beyond what made it into TOC's traditional "They Wuz Robbed" piece (which will also appear, in slightly different form, in this week's print issue.

It's just taken me a while to get to it, as I've had an action-packed weekend that, delightfully, included seeing four very good shows—three of them are listed at left; the fourth was an appearance at Schubas by one of my favorite singer-songwriters, Jeffrey Foucault.

But back to the Jeffs.

Review day updates

New reviews at TOC: Fatboy, Dolly West's Kitchen and 1776. Read the rest of the reviews from Christopher, Novid and Brian here.

That TOC blog post about the Jeffs that I pointed to in my last post erupted into a real shitstorm today. As of this writing, 14 comments, and it was one of the most requested pages on the site today. (And I got a lot of incoming clicks on my own post from various webmails, so at least one of you out there is mailing it around.) So far the defenders of non-Equity theater—many of them theater artists, many of them designers declaring that they're members of their own unions and work on both sides of the Equity divide—are outnumbering the non-Equity bashers nearly 2-to-1, but the bashers will brook no arguments. With statements like "Julie is completely correct. The example she chose (Goodman/Lifeline) is based on sound judgement and is unarguable," well, it starts to feel like you're debating gay marriage with Fred Phelps. I beg of you, non-Equity bashers, tell me who bought you that Hater-ade you're drinking?

In happier traffic news, I got to chatting with a young playwright on the bus Saturday after we'd both attended the panel on female playwrights at Chicago Dramatists that I mentioned a couple of weeks ago. (I hope to have some notes from the panel up on the TOC Blog tomorrow.) Eventually I asked her how she'd found out about the panel: was it in TOC's listings, the Reader, maybe she's on Chicago Dramatists' mailing list—this is naturally something that interests me.

She thought for a second, and said, "Oh, you know, I saw it on Storefront Rebellion. Do you know that blog?"

Awesome. And hi, Jenny.

Professional behavior

Friday on the TOC Blog, Christopher posted about some changes being planned by the Jeff committee—most notably, to us, the retirement of the "Citations." The year's two award ceremonies will now be known as the Equity Jeff Awards and the Non-Equity Jeff Awards.

We thought this was a great move, but the first comment we got on the post was a hysterical accusation that the Jeff committee was "disrespecting" the "professional" theater companies by giving non-Equity awards with the same name. "There is nothing you can write that will convince me The Goodman Theatre efforts should be considered in the same playing field as (ex) Lifeline," the commenter wrote, and furthermore, "They should have done the exact opposite-more to separate the professional and non-professional theatres in this city."

While we've discussed this here before, it seems to bear revisiting. There's clearly a contingent out there that fervently believes all non-Equity theater companies might as well be community theater, as these same folks often fan the flames of this argument in the comments at The Theater Loop as well. I can't for the life of me figure out who these people are. I have a hard time believing they're theater artists. In some other city, maybe (and when non-Equity tours of Broadway musicals come through town charging Equity-tour prices [*cough*Rent*cough*], I hope Equity pickets those shows). But as far as our homegrown theater, Chicago is different. Equity even acknowledges that by the existence of Chicago Area Theatre contracts.

As I mentioned in the comments at TOC, the "brand audit" on which basis the Jeffs are making these changes was based on interviews with managing and artistic directors at theaters both Equity and non. In other words, this is based on what the theaters indicated they thought should happen.

And as I also said there, I have to believe that the people getting so hung up on "professional" and "non-professional" have a limited understanding of the way theater actually works in Chicago. The Equity and non-Equity designations are only an indication of the theater's status with the actors' union. Let's not forget that there are directors and designers in the mix as well. Take Dolly West's Kitchen at TimeLine, since I was at that premiere last night. The cast is all non-Equity, and the show will go in the Non-Equity wing of the Jeffs, but the production staff includes director Kimberly Senior, scenic designer Brian Bembridge, costume designer Christine Conley, lighting designer Charles Cooper, and sound designer Tamara Roberts, all of whom work regularly on both sides of the Equity divide. (Consider also that PJ Powers told Nina Metz in the Trib two years ago that TimeLine's budget had reached half a million dollars. Does that sound like community theater?)

Then there's the range of CAT contracts. Many companies that are in the Equity wing of the Jeffs (and that our commenter would presumably consider "professional") run under contracts like the CAT-N, and can have casts with the likes of one Equity actor to 15 non-Equity (to name one show I saw not too long ago). That's why non-Equity performers often get nominated for Equity Jeff Awards already, as with Sara Sevigny's win at last fall's ceremony for Porchlight's Assassins.

And of course don't forget that big theaters like the Goodman and Steppenwolf provide day jobs for untold numbers of young artists who are running their own non-Equity companies by night. It's not simply a dichotomy of "professional" and "non-professional" in Chicago; happily, there's so much more interplay among all the levels than folks like our commenter seem to realize.

So you see why I find it hard to imagine our artists having this vitriolic attitude towards non-Equity companies. Which leads back to the question: Who are these misguided people zealously defending the Goodman's honor? Where are they getting their ideas, and who's encouraging them to think this way?

Also of note this week: My story from Wednesday's issue on PJ Paparelli's bold plans for American Theater Company was enhanced by Friday's announcement of ATC's next season. "Bold plans" starts to look like an understatement.

Actors! We've got actors! No, really, we do.

I really need to stop staying up late to post here on SR, especially when I have so many deadlines for TOC pieces tomorrow to worry about. But I'm inspired by Isaac's post today titled The Necessity of Actors. He quotes an unnamed New York director who'd recently directed a show out of town:

One of the things i've been noticing lately is that-- look, it was always difficult to get older actors to work regionally, right? Because who wants to travel. But the thing I've noticed lately is that younger actors... their agents won't even let them audition for a regional show. Because while they're doing that regional show, they could be auditioning every day for a commercial that they'll make more money doing. And once you can't get good actors to even audition for you? That's pretty much game over. The next step is them not auditioning for theatre period. Because their daytime rehearsals would still take them out of the running for commercial and pilot auditions.

My first thought upon seeing this in my feed reader this afternoon was, Why do you have to bring your actors with you from New York in the first place? Clicking over to the post, I discovered that several others had beaten me to the same punch in the comments, including Tony Adams and Kerry Reid. I left a comment there anyway, but I'll expand upon it here.

Where did we get this idea that major regional theaters need to import actors? Why not cast locally? Okay, maybe San Diego's Old Globe or the Seattle Rep don't have a broad enough base of actors to call upon—and I'm not necessarily saying they don't, I don't know those scenes—but lord knows Chicago has good actors aplenty. So why is it that companies like Chicago Shakes and the Goodman feel the need to bring in actors from New York or Toronto or wherever else to play their leads?

As Kerry said in the comments on Isaac's post, local actors can help build local audiences. I know one of the things I enjoy as a critic and an audience member is the opportunity to follow an actor's career, to be able to see her or him progress through different companies and different roles. When Gary Griffin's production of Passion at CST uses three out-of-towners for its leads (Ana Gasteyer, Adam Brazier and Kathy Voytko), that opportunity is lost for me. Why did the Jeff for Best Actor go to Torontoan (Torontoite?) Ben Carlson? I'm not knocking him, but were there no Chicagoans suited to play Hamlet?

At least Stacy Keach is somewhat of a name. Maybe casting him as Lear brought in higher ticket sales for the Goodman. Maybe casting Keach plus a host of other imports, like Linda Lavin and Matthew Modine, in the Goodman's premiere of Arthur Miller's last play sells more tickets. But it does make one wonder what is particularly Chicago about Chicago's most prominent theaters.

And while we're at it, it makes me wonder what's so good for Chicago about Wicked. The production may provide lip service to the city's theater community by giving extended employment in secondary roles to some of our hometown favorites (Rondi Reed, Gene Weygandt, Barbara Robertson), but the producers always look elsewhere for the leads. Has anyone in power ever considered that newly-Equity Jess Godwin, for instance, might make a kickass Galinda? Doubtful.

When Chicago's big theaters bring in outside talent, they're paying for travel, housing and per diem costs on top of wages. Anyone who laments the fact that so many promising Chicago actors start their careers here before heading for one of the coasts should take this into account.

In my comment on Isaac's post, I quoted from an interview TOC did with Judith Ivey a little over a year ago when she was in town directing Theresa Rebeck's Bad Dates at Northlight. (The fact that I was seeing a production of Rebeck's Sunday on the Rocks tonight at Bailiwick brought it to mind.) I'll quote it again here. Ivey was a working actor in Chicago in the ’70s before departing for New York in 1978. When my colleague Novid Parsi asked her why she left, she said this:

To be honest, it’s what I call the regional-theater disease. They kept bringing young actresses from New York to play the leading ladies, and in two instances—this was at the Goodman Theatre at that time—they ended up being disappointed in them and came to me privately and said, “We may fire this actress. Would you take over the part if we do?” And of course my answer was, “Yes.” And they would end up not firing her and then just letting that role not be done as well. And then the next production would come up, and they would still go to New York and cast yet another actress that, to be honest, wasn’t as good as I was. And so I thought, Well, I’m gonna go to New York and see if I can at least get a job to come back to Chicago, you know. And I never did. I came back once when we were trying out Hurlyburly, and that’s really the only time I’ve been back—much to my dismay, really, ’cause I love Chicago.

For the record, Ivey's production of Bad Dates at Northlight starred L.A.'s Beth Broderick.

I used up my awesome Frank Rich post title over there.

That recap of last night's Frank Rich talk I mentioned can be found here, at the TOC blog, as can Christopher's hilarious recap of the Jeff Awards. Neither of us is sure what to make of the fact that, possibly for the first time ever, we put up two theater-related blog posts in the same morning, and neither of them got a single comment all day.

Please also go back and check out the comments on my previous post, where Kerry and another commenter both called me out on an egregious offense.

---

While I'm at it, I'll point to my new review of Promethean Theatre Ensemble's The Light of Love, and all of this week's other reviews available at the TOC Theater section, as well as the thing I meant to link to last week and never got around to, the expanded version of my chat with About Face's Eric Rosen, of which a much smaller form appeared in last week's print issue. It's worth a read, if I do say so myself.

Hey New Yorkers:

Is comparing plays by women to Lifetime movies just Charles Isherwood's default these days?

To be fair, I didn't see When the Messenger is Hot when it was at Steppenwolf a couple of months back, but (correct me if I'm wrong) this is starting to seem like a pattern.

---

On the positive side, Mr. Isherwood's Sunday meditation on subsidized ticket prices (notably the Signature Theater experiment) was well done, and coincided remarkably with Peter Marks's Sunday WaPo piece on similar trials in D.C. How does this apply to Chicago, I wonder? Now that I compile the theater listings for TOC, I'm well aware that many Chicago shows are available for $20 or less (we have a special listings icon that accompanies any show for which all available tickets are $20 or under). But most of the shows with this designation are listed in the "Fringe & storefront" section, the one that lists shows where the dailies fear to tread. The phenomenon that the Times and Post are talking about is higher-end theaters offering cheap-ass tickets; this is not unheard of here either—some seats for some nights of the Goodman's upcoming second-space production of The Cook are available for ten bucks.

But what both Isherwood and Marks (and others like Mr. Eisler) seem to be saying is that discount tickets on certain nights, or tickets that are made available through mailing lists or outlets like HotTix or Gold Star Events, aren't going to do the trick, since they only engage patrons that are already looking to be audience members. If the Goodman or Chicago Shakes or Broadway in Chicago were to take on a corporate sponsorship to subsidize cheap tickets, would it be worth it? If current non-theater goers could see shows at Steppenwolf for 15 bucks, would it encourage them to try storefront shows at the same price? If they saw Steppenwolf shows for 15 bucks, would they be disappointed by storefront production values?

---

On another note, I am utterly mystified by the Jeff Committee this season. David's blog post today is (fair enough) indignant about The Birds non-recommendation (and again, to be fair, I haven't yet seen the Handbag show and I recuse myself on their shows because I'm friends with too many of their ensemble members). But even before David's sense of being egregiously overlooked (and really, why in the hell wasn't Caged Dames recommended?), the Jeff recommendations this Fall have left me feeling like I'm taking crazy pills. Nearly everything I've loved this season has gone unrecognized. Ape and The Busy World is Hushed were first, but since then The Magnificents, Merchant on Venice, and Songs for a New World have gone unrecognized. (Early last week there was apparently a delay in updating the Jeffs website, and I thought Remy Bumppo's Fiction had gone unrecognized as well. Sadly, I was mistaken.)

---

Anyway, occasionally the Jeff committee gets things right. Like with the other shows I saw this weekend, the Chicago production of Altar Boyz and the Hypocrites' production of Desire Under the Elms. Separately, I also reviewed We Won't Pay! We Won't Pay!

Where is this Theater Loop exactly?

You know, it's not that I enjoy harping on the Tribune and Chris Jones. I've never spoken with Chris, and I'm sure he's a very nice man. I agree with his takes on shows as often as not. It's just that I'm utterly mystified by his priorities.

Consider the comment left by "Tom" on Chris's blog post about the Jeff Citations. "Tom" writes, "Wow, almost an eighth of the coverage of sundays awards."

I did a quick word count, and wouldn't you know it. At "The Theater Loop," Chris wrote 2,464 words about this year's Tony Awards (leaving aside the list of nominees and winners, although he'd taken the trouble in that list to make his predictions), including an in-depth preview and lengthy recap. About the Jeffs? 440 words, just-the-facts-ma'am, analysis-free. The cursory Jeffs post is followed by one about the playwright Peter Morgan that's apropos of nothing (nothing related to Chicago, that is).

It seems like a disservice to the Trib's readers that the lead critic of the leading paper devotes so much of his blog, the one that's tagged as "all about America's most edgy and exciting theater city" (not to mention his column inches in print) going on about Broadway or Broadway tours—and seems to have little interest in actual Chicago theater. Where are those priorities? Perhaps Linda Winer is retiring, and Chris is angling to get the next Tribune Company New York transfer?

It's a stark contrast to the study I posted this morning, the one that examined the influence of Chris's predecessor Richard Christiansen, who championed the city's small theaters and nurtured what became known as the "Chicago Style." Now the Tribune nurtures a billion-dollar business in another city.

Jeff Citation recipients

Last month I typed up my wishlist for the Jeff Citations, and tonight several of my wishes were granted. (I also pointed out some of the egregiously overlooked, but nothing could be done about them.)

Deborah Hearst for Profiles' Fat Pig and Peter Oyloe for Actors Workshop's Equus took home Jeffs for Leading Actress and Actor in the play categories, and neither could deserve it more. Both of these shows extended a number of times, and both featured good direction and good ensembles, but they both ran largely on the shoulders of these two great performances.

Bohemian Theatre Ensemble's Side Show unsurprisingly received more citations than any other musical, including a well-deserved pair for its Hilton sisters, Vanessa Panerosa and Andrea Prestinario.

I'm disappointed that Signal Ensemble's The Weir went home empty-handed; all three of its nominations were well-deserved. In fact none of the other nominations I praised last month turned into Citations, which is a shame. Note that, since the Citations are non-competitive and often have multiple winners, I'm not necessarily dissing the winners in these categories by saying I wish my picks had won. (There were, in fact, some Citation recipients tonight by which I'm mystified, but I'm not going to point them out on the internet. If you want to know who they are, buy me a beer and ask me in person.)

Full list of winners oops, I mean recipients after the jump.