Media Longenpalooza!
posted by on January 3 at 17:26 PM
I’m so sorry, John Longenbaugh. I know you’re a devoted reader of the Slog, so it was terribly impolite of me to keep you waiting for a response to your Seattle Weekly feature on the graceless collapse of Seattle theater.
As you might imagine, I have some quibbles.
One: It’s certainly heartwarming to read about White Christmas at the 5th Avenue, even if some of your metaphors (“They’ve nailed the Irving Berlin tunes with the determined proficiency of so many master carpenters”) are a bit belabored. But did you and Lindy West truly see the same show?
Anyway. After seeing what was, in your account, an uplifting show, you work yourself into quite a funk:
Surrounded by happy theatergoers in a holiday mood, and having watched, worked in, and thought about Seattle theater for the past 12 years, why was I so melancholy? Why did I find myself again questioning that civic truth that we’re a great town for theater? Why is it that every theater person I talk to, administrators, artistic directors, and artists, all feel the same thing—that it’s getting harder to produce theater in Seattle?
Uh, because rents are going up? Because different kinds of entertainment are competing for audiences, and different kinds of philanthropy are competing for donors? Because theater in Seattle is largely uninspiring?
Your hypothesis:
It could be because our theaters keep closing.
I’m sorry to say it, Mr. Longenbaugh, but this is circular logic. If you wanted to write a feature about the closure of Empty Space and the effect it would have on the theater scene, you should have pitched that. Even when your feature wanders in that direction, however, it’s not very convincing:
For many directors looking to cast local productions, the Space was an invaluable link between the unsalaried work of the fringe theaters and the paying professional work of the mainstages. “The Space worked under the conditions of a professional theater. If a younger actor had worked there, you knew that they knew the drill,” says [Kurt] Beattie [ACT artistic director]. “Young talented actors had a way to achieve vocation, a mentoring through their work. When the midsize theaters go, casting for us is so much more a leap of faith.”
I certainly buy this in theory, but unless Beattie can give me some examples, I’m not going to shed many tears of sympathy over how risky it is for the big houses to hire fringe actors. Sharia Pierce (Memory House at Seattle Rep, Mitzi’s Abortion at ACT) is cited in Joe Adcock’s article as an example of an Empty Space protegee. But she only worked backstage at Empty Space, and got her first major acting exposure in a fringe production—Blasted at Union Garage (and later rented space at Intiman). Sarah Rudinoff is probably a decent example from Empty Space’s recent history, but she isn’t performing regularly now. Plenty of younger actors get the kind of professional experience Beattie’s talking about at the “big-four” Seattle Children’s Theatre, soon after graduating from school. Empty Space was an important training ground a few years ago, but I don’t see how a season consisting of one one-woman show and one ten-person show was going to mentor the next generation of Seattle actors.
Meanwhile, Mr. Longenbaugh, you let Scott Nolte cry about how hard it is for Taproot Theatre to raise money without noting that Taproot is a Christian theater:
“If we don’t have the expertise of fundraisers who can raise the big funds, what do we do?” asks Scott Nolte, artistic director of midsized Taproot Theatre. “Those personnel are increasingly expensive, and we have to fall back on our board and expect them to do more legwork. If I have to compete with the Rep for a corporate sponsorship, they’ve got the history, they’ve got the numbers that give them the edge.”
Being secular undoubtedly gives the Rep an edge with corporations too. On the other hand, Nolte can reach into Christian pockets that the Rep can’t hope to touch.
But what really gets me about Longenbaugh’s piece is his backhanded praise of Washington Ensemble Theatre:
It’s Washington Ensemble Theatre, or WET, that’s mentioned, over and over, as the “next Empty Space” by many of the people I know. And the company deserves a lot of the hype. Their most recent ensemble production, Never Swim Alone, was a wicked and powerful burst of theater, a physically demanding three-hander about a pair of businessmen engaged in a life-or-death struggle for alpha-dog status. It walked a razor-thin edge between humor and violence, exciting as a prize fight and intriguing as a whodunit. The set, the commitment of the actors, and the style of the script reminded me of the best of what the Space had to offer.When we went out for drinks after the show, I found myself equally charmed and impressed by these smart and articulate young UW grads who’ve built their own space and their own audiences in just two years. Everything about them makes a somewhat-grizzled theater guy like me cheerful: their talent, their enthusiasm, and the sheer amount of work they’re willing to undertake.
But it’s also clear that what WET excels at right now is the work, not the management. Company members have just started paying themselves a monthly stipend of $25 (though they pay guest artists more), their artistic structure is “still evolving,” and their modest 49-seat house still has a rent under $2,000 a month. They’ve yet to incorporate as a nonprofit 501c3—a move that allows people to give them tax- deductible donations, makes the group eligible for larger grants from corporations and foundations, and is generally perceived as a sign that you’re a “professional” company—and have only recently begun seeking candidates for their board. So while they deserve their hype as theater artists, seeing them as the Great Shining Hope of Seattle Theater is like predicting a future Pulitzer for your 12-year-old niece based on her prize-winning middle-school essay: It’s just too early to know.
Dude, did you even bother to ask WET, over drinks, if they’re trying to be the “next Empty Space”? Their ensemble model is nothing like Empty Space’s—though it may be vaguely similar to Seattle Rep’s model in the ’60s and ’70s, on a smaller scale. And comparing WET to a 12-year-old, even in an analogy, is pretty insulting. If they’re doing some of the best theater in Seattle, and giving (low-paid) work to young Seattle actors, then that’s what matters. Not their size or their perceived professionalism. (You also might have noted that they can accept donations through their umbrella organization, Theatre Puget Sound.)
There is some delightful news at the end of Longenbaugh’s piece:
John Longenbaugh is a Seattle playwright and director. His weekly column on Seattle theater will start in this paper next week.
I really couldn’t be more excited. Probably a weekly commentary on the column will appear on this blog. But Mr. Longenbaugh, does that mean you rescind the following?:
But rather than engage in any more button-pushing, I’ll just say that I’m just as glad that you’re out of theatre criticism as I am glad to be out of it myself. I would guess we’re both tempermentally unsuited to it.Posted by: John Longenbaugh | October 27, 2006 04:59 PM
Do you have a life?
As in, interested and involved in local theater in a big American city and paid to write about it? Seems lively to me.
Jeez. Will you two fuck already and get it over with?
Tom -- Jesus Christ, you may well be right! Longenbaugh'd better be up to sexy-snuff, as he's, uh, sorta cut-doctor-losing so far. He'd def have to come outta nowhere, move-wise.
Dammit, I got so caught up in the idea I totally erased my sock-slippers joke about gramps @1.
nice concluding zinger.
I really couldn’t be more excited.
The rest of us will have to use our imaginations.
John Longenbaugh is smarter than you. Please treat him accordingly.
I read this post, scrolling down, thinking WET WET WET and then bam you hit him with both barrels. Good for you. the Ensemble regularly works miracles on $1.98 budgets. Ticket prices are a steal. Performances are electric. The sets are professional and SOOOO different from show to show, it's like you are not in the same space. My friend ELB put it this way, "I want to see every show they do. I don't care what it is."
Lightning, bottled, on 19th Ave E.
Dear Annie:
I think it's sweet the way you call me "Mr. Longenbaugh."
I didn't really feel like your heart was in this critique. It was actually sort of tepid. I'm sure you'll be able to muster some more indignation in the weeks to come though.
I'd write more, but unlike you, I don't get paid for writing in your blog.
Best,
John
Actually, I don't think Annie gets paid for writing for this blog either.
get him, annie! kick that scanctimonious turd and his tragic metaphoring right in the theatrical nuts! i wish at least one seattle theatre (yes, i said theatRE) would close with HIM still LOCKED INSIDE IT. then whe could bulldoze it for condos. saving perhaps pike/pine and ridding the world of john fucking loggenbaugh ot whatever. never mind. the weed just kicked in. but, GET HIM ANNIE!
Hmmm....Dude, just keep your gloves up. Trying to put extra spoonfuls of powerade powder into your nalgene isn't going to help.
Despite the obvious Hepburn/Tracey love-hate overtones between you two, I have to say in all honesty that John's "commentary" (technically, not the same as "criticism", at least as I understand the practice), is an old one, as arts writers in this town have been lamenting the loss of our "theatrical edge" since companies like Skid Road Theatre went belly up in the late 1970's. Theatre, like any other dynamic organism, has its own cycles of growth and decay; the past five or six years have perhaps seemed to many who've only been here a relatively short time as indicative of a decline in the overall health of the organism, but in reality, it's just been another dip in an on-going boom/bust cycle, and from what I can see at least, I think it's pretty much bottomed-out for this round.
Certainly, the death of any mid-tier organization is a blow to the larger community, if only because it tends to knock out significantly important rungs in the ladder that allow young artists to progress from the no-pay, shoe-string budgeted fringe, and progress upward to gradually more professional, and higher-paying companies. And yes, losing EST was a blow perhaps more keenly felt, because of all the effort put forth on the part of many people just a couple of years ago to bring it back from the brink, only to watch in shock and horror as its new board, most of whom had little or no experience in the non-profit realm, kneecapped the organization just when things were starting to look up again for it. That too is an old story, as similar incidents such as have occurred at On
The boards, 911 Media Arts, and ConWorks in recent years can testify.
And yet, despite the "recent" demise (c'mon The Bathhouse went under nearly 10 years ago! - take off the black armband already!) of these companies, there have also been some success stories, a few of which John's article mentioned. Taproot (which, BTW has considerably softened its "ecumenical imperitive" over the past four seasons, in favor of plays with more universally moralistic themes), Seattle Shakes, and Book-it all started out more-or-less as fringe companies that have grown to at least partially fill the niche vacated by older mid-tier companies; Tacoma Actors Guild, which two years ago was effectively as "dead" as EST is now, just hired a new artistic director and is on the way to full recovery. In the meantime, smaller semi-pro companies such as Mirror Stage, Strawberry Theatre, and Wooden O have emerged on the scene, while venerable fringe companies such as Annex, Live Girls! and Theater Schmeater (and throw in venue Theatre Off Jackson for good measure) have either recently built new spaces or are refurbishing older ones.
And this doesn't even include the proliferation of new start-ups, WET being only the most notable example. Throw in new, noteworthy troupes such as Balagan, Absurd Reality, BrownBox, Our American Theatre Company, Straight Edge Theatrics, and The Community Theatre, just to name a few. Top it off with a burgeoning local playwrighting scene, new spaces cropping up outside the CapHill/Lower Queen Anne theatre districts (Art's Theatre in Beacon Hill, Youngstown in West Seattle, Live Girls! in Ballard, Building 30 at Sandpoint, the Chapel in Wallingford, just off the top of my head), and it seems pretty clear to this 20+ year observer of the Seattle theatre scene that, while we've certainly had our share of bumps along the road, things are still pretty good in this town.
Nature abhors a vacuum, and inevitably new and emerging companies will rise to the challenge of filling empty niches in the ecosystem, thus keeping it vibrant and healthy. So, John's dire prognostications to the contrary, I'd have to say Seattle does in fact continue to deserve its well-earned reputation for being a "theatre town".
I just read this week's Seattle Weekly cover to cover (you guys delivered the Stranger late to my fave coffee shop in Fremont ...) and it's just going downhill faster and faster.
CC--
Re: criticism: I was referring to his forthcoming column. But John emailed me to say his column won't be criticism, so we can relax on that score. Though I'm equally excited to see him go head to head with Brendan in the theater news department.
John Longenbaugh is smarter than you. Please treat him accordingly.
So you know him personally?
Motion of necessity requires a change in perspective. But stop defining theatre in Seattle by its institutions. These organizations come and go and change personalities; the Empty Space Theatre that the Trustees closed in 2006 in no way resembled the Empty Space of 919 E. Pike in 1976. Could any of the Empty Space's 2006 Board members even name the Trustees of the Empty Space thirty years ago?
When these theaters go belly-up, and the volunteer Board members return to their real-world occupations, the artists and craftspeople, who did the heavy lifting - subsidizing the theatre through low or no wages, are the ones left behind.
The theatre artists of Seattle are hanging in there.
I love the fact that you guys have enough time during the day to stroke your own ego rather than produce good fact-based news that you take time out to hit those who do and to not respond to a reader who's annoyed that you aren't delivering on time. I went out Wednesday night to a restaurant on Broadway and I saw the paper being delivered at about 5 p.m. 5 p.m.! the Seattle Weekly had been out for well over six hours by that point... up the anty a little and get off of here and focus on your own paper!
Well, the Weekly is published a day earlier than we are. You Wednesday readers are the early birds.
Duh, read the publication date Stiffler - The Stranger has always listed it as Thursday.
In fact, The Weakly used to come out on Thursday too, but switched to Wednesdays a number of years back, presumably so as not to have to compete head-to-head with The Stranger for eyeballs on the same day.
This is a great Blog!
I love how no one addressed the rest of my comment, but went straight for the easy answers.
OK, Stiffler. To state the obvious, my job description encompasses editing, writing film and theater criticism, and blogging. I am only incidentally and occasionally a reporter of "good fact-based news." We have a news department. Go complain on their posts, if that's your real beef. I kind of doubt it is, because a) Longenbaugh's article was a think piece, and didn't contain much original, fact-based reportage; and b) Brendan Kiley wrote a fact-based column on the closure of the theater two full months before Longenbaugh's feature ran.
Comments Closed
In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).