![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Blood Red Soap.
Savage in Limbo goes up in fifteen hours. I won't be there, but the Whackedor will.
And I'm pissed.
I wasn't angry when the Whackedor went insane. I have better things to do than care about that. But the decisions the company has been making are beyond idiotic, and that pisses me off.
Apparently, the "understudy" for the Whackedor is unprepared and unwilling to take over. My friend, the one who's like family, the one who has been going through more hell than me since Sunday, has been informed that she can't step out because her "understudy" is unprepared and unwilling to take over.
So I'm sending in the board my resignation letter in a few hours. You might notice that I'm slightly miffed at them. Notes are appreciated.
Dear Sirs and Madams,
It is with great sorrow, regret and disappointment that I tender my resignation as a stage manager for the Theater Company, effective today, January 29, 2004, subsequent to the board's final decisions regarding the assault that occurred on January 25. Further, in light of these recent decisions, I will be unable to collaborate with the Theater Company in this capacity in the future.
The role of the stage manager during the run of a performance is manifold. Beyond running the technical mundanities of each performance, he must prepare actors, coordinate the box office and handle any number of unforseen crises. With the director absent after opening night, and the producers concerning themselves with financial issues like marketing and publicity, the stage manager is the last remaining decision maker on site before, during and after each performance. The stage manager represents the director and the producers during the run of the show. He is often called upon to make spot decisions to ensure that the show can continue. He can make these decisions confidently because he knows he has the trust of the producers and the director; and conversely, the director and producers can rest easier knowing that all issues, barring the most troubling and long-term, will be dealt with by the stage manager.
The situation with the current show, and the situation on the 25th specifically, is notably different. Two board members and producers are also cast members, making them present at every performance. A third producer, also the director, has been at most performances; and on the 25th, he was running the box office. When Mr. W_______ became violently irrational, before the performance, it became clear to me that further asserting the stage manager's authority would be a dangerous tactic, as I was already the focal point of his rage. It was far more prudent, then, to defer authority to those from whom it derived, the producers there present.
I wish to make it clear that, had I not been the target of the rage, had I been able to act purely as a stage manager and not Mr. W________'s mistakenly-perceived antagonist, there would have been no hesitation about the outcome. He would have been thrown out of the theater, even if it required, as Mr. W_______ so vehemently insisted it would, the involvement of the Los Angeles Police Department. As a stage manager, I find Mr. W_______'s actions to be intolerable and meriting of immediate dismissal. I had presumed that, in thinking this, I would have the agreement and support of the producers.
Instead, the board of this company, comprising the producers of the show, has reached the decision that it will tolerate irrational, volatile and violent behavior on its stage. It has decided that it is acceptable for an employee and performer to verbally and physically assault other actors and their representative, the stage manager. It has decided to tacitly condone threats of illegal harassment. It has valued the mental and physical health and well-being of its other performers and employees less than the ego of a person who insulted all of them.
I believe these decisions to be illogical, wrongheaded and utterly reprehensible. It is eminently clear to me that I cannot effectively represent a company board whose decisions so blatantly contravene my values, morals and common sense.
A further irresponsible board decision has manifested during this crisis. The events of this week have been exacerbated by the decision to maintain two "understudies" who were unprepared and unwilling to take on the roles they had been assigned. As a stage manager who would have been responsible for calling these understudies, possibly with only minutes' notice, I am shocked that such "understudies" were maintained in secret.
I continue to esteem the members of this board individually and as performers, but my trust in the board has been eroded to nil by these decisions. Despite my affection, and although it grieves me to say so, I cannot and will not involve myself professionally with a company that is mismanaged in such a way.
I wish the best of luck for the Theater Company, and I pray that future actions are blessed with wisdom.
Sincerely,
Tablesaw
(Update: Sent at 9:15 PST.)
And I'm pissed.
I wasn't angry when the Whackedor went insane. I have better things to do than care about that. But the decisions the company has been making are beyond idiotic, and that pisses me off.
Apparently, the "understudy" for the Whackedor is unprepared and unwilling to take over. My friend, the one who's like family, the one who has been going through more hell than me since Sunday, has been informed that she can't step out because her "understudy" is unprepared and unwilling to take over.
So I'm sending in the board my resignation letter in a few hours. You might notice that I'm slightly miffed at them. Notes are appreciated.
Dear Sirs and Madams,
It is with great sorrow, regret and disappointment that I tender my resignation as a stage manager for the Theater Company, effective today, January 29, 2004, subsequent to the board's final decisions regarding the assault that occurred on January 25. Further, in light of these recent decisions, I will be unable to collaborate with the Theater Company in this capacity in the future.
The role of the stage manager during the run of a performance is manifold. Beyond running the technical mundanities of each performance, he must prepare actors, coordinate the box office and handle any number of unforseen crises. With the director absent after opening night, and the producers concerning themselves with financial issues like marketing and publicity, the stage manager is the last remaining decision maker on site before, during and after each performance. The stage manager represents the director and the producers during the run of the show. He is often called upon to make spot decisions to ensure that the show can continue. He can make these decisions confidently because he knows he has the trust of the producers and the director; and conversely, the director and producers can rest easier knowing that all issues, barring the most troubling and long-term, will be dealt with by the stage manager.
The situation with the current show, and the situation on the 25th specifically, is notably different. Two board members and producers are also cast members, making them present at every performance. A third producer, also the director, has been at most performances; and on the 25th, he was running the box office. When Mr. W_______ became violently irrational, before the performance, it became clear to me that further asserting the stage manager's authority would be a dangerous tactic, as I was already the focal point of his rage. It was far more prudent, then, to defer authority to those from whom it derived, the producers there present.
I wish to make it clear that, had I not been the target of the rage, had I been able to act purely as a stage manager and not Mr. W________'s mistakenly-perceived antagonist, there would have been no hesitation about the outcome. He would have been thrown out of the theater, even if it required, as Mr. W_______ so vehemently insisted it would, the involvement of the Los Angeles Police Department. As a stage manager, I find Mr. W_______'s actions to be intolerable and meriting of immediate dismissal. I had presumed that, in thinking this, I would have the agreement and support of the producers.
Instead, the board of this company, comprising the producers of the show, has reached the decision that it will tolerate irrational, volatile and violent behavior on its stage. It has decided that it is acceptable for an employee and performer to verbally and physically assault other actors and their representative, the stage manager. It has decided to tacitly condone threats of illegal harassment. It has valued the mental and physical health and well-being of its other performers and employees less than the ego of a person who insulted all of them.
I believe these decisions to be illogical, wrongheaded and utterly reprehensible. It is eminently clear to me that I cannot effectively represent a company board whose decisions so blatantly contravene my values, morals and common sense.
A further irresponsible board decision has manifested during this crisis. The events of this week have been exacerbated by the decision to maintain two "understudies" who were unprepared and unwilling to take on the roles they had been assigned. As a stage manager who would have been responsible for calling these understudies, possibly with only minutes' notice, I am shocked that such "understudies" were maintained in secret.
I continue to esteem the members of this board individually and as performers, but my trust in the board has been eroded to nil by these decisions. Despite my affection, and although it grieves me to say so, I cannot and will not involve myself professionally with a company that is mismanaged in such a way.
I wish the best of luck for the Theater Company, and I pray that future actions are blessed with wisdom.
Sincerely,
Tablesaw
(Update: Sent at 9:15 PST.)
no subject
I'm actually more disgusted by the understudy situation than the original occurrence. They can't run psyche screenings to know that someone is looney. But once someone has shown themselves to be a threat to the health of others, they need to be removed. And understudies are supposed to be able to perform. Otherwise, they need not be there. And anyone who let incompetent understudies stay is too unprofessional to be involved in theatre.
That said, I'm sorry you have to be in this boat to begin with, especially given the number of people from this company who you clearly did enjoy working with.
no subject
Copy-editing meddlesomeness follows (white-on-white for easier ignoring if you don't want it): Paragraph 2--add a comma after "before." Paragraph 4: the bit about "a straw-man antagonist of another's delusion" could be toned down to something like "W's mistakenly-perceived antagonist;" that makes you sound more cool-headed. Paragraph 5: "over the period of days" interrupts the flow and could be omitted. The slowness of the decision-making is another beef entirely, that you may choose not to address.
Zero tolerance
Basically, I'm just trying to say that you are one hundred percent doing the right thing. Hopefully, they will read your letter and actually take it to heart.
Re: Zero tolerance
no subject
A few notes with an editor's eye:
- "Beyond running the technical mundanities of each performance, he must prepare actors, coordinate the box office." -- There's something missing in this sentence; either it should be "prepare actors and coordinate the box office," or you may have left out some other task you intended to include.
- Not sure about the word "retired" in "..the producers retired..." Perhaps just "the producers concerned with...". Also, add commas after "before" and "during."
- "He is often called upon to spot decisions" -- think you dropped the
word "make" before "spot."
- "A third producer, also the director, has been at most performances;" -- change that semicolon to a comma. And delete the comma after "became irrational."
- I agree with
- I would say "It has valued the ... health and well-being... less than" rather than "to be less important than."
- Perhaps "As a stage manager... I am shocked" rather than "it is shocking," for parallelism. Also, is it worth adding another sentence saying that if there were to be understudies, they should have been prepared to fill these roles?
- "Perpetrators of such appalling mismanagement" may be too strong a word (in the sense of wanting to sound coolheaded). Perhaps something like "I cannot and will not involve myself professionally with a company that is mismanaged in such a way." Or something like that.
Anyway, overall I think this is a very good letter. You may burn some bridges with it, but it sounds like they may be bridges that deserve burning.
And for your friend: Can she also resign, if the conditions are so intolerable? It might throw the production into disarray, but would she be breaking any kind of contractual agreement if she did?
Re:
And my friend could, in theory, resign, but that would also be very traumatic for her. She's a more active member of the company, she handles the finances, she brings in the most donor dollars, and the largest percentage of reservations for the remaining shows are her friends and family. It's very likely that if she steps down, the show will be forced to close. And since most of the other board members have been loath to make the tough decision, she's been feeling like the weight of the entire show has been placed on her.
And really, this isn't about burning bridges. I think that these actors don't understand how to make decisions as producers and are waiting for someone else to make a decision. I feel they need to get a sense of the conseqeunces of their decisions.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject