|
Erik Sherman |
|
Complex ideas elegantly expressed |
|
Producer’s Notebook |
|
The third case is the trickiest. In a number of the submissions, it is clear to me that the writers actually thought they were meeting requirements – specifically, the “minimum technical requirements” mentioned – when in my view they weren’t. Something I’ll learn for the future is to specify absolutely everything beyond the point I would think necessary. Low tech now becomes “bare stage; minimum requirements for furniture or other set pieces of any sort, all of which must be easily carried in the day of the performance; area wash lighting only; preferably no specific costume requirements.” I would have thought this fairly obvious for minimum tech, but I can only assume that few playwrights have much experience actually doing theater. Not just doing some acting or maybe a spot of directing, but the type of experience people get in summer stock or community theater, where people often have to help in various areas. If you want to write for the stage, you have to understand how theater actually works. Otherwise you’re placing an order that others will have to fill, and their solution may be to find another script. You are also making a name for yourself, whether you realize it or not. Now, I’m extrapolating some from the publishing industry, but that’s what happens. Editors will remember those writers that are difficult or that don’t listen, and such people find themselves not getting additional assignments. Show disregard or ignorance in your submissions and you’re marking yourself as someone who either doesn’t care enough about the producing organization to even offer basic courtesy, or who is so ignorant as to promise future difficulties even if the material had been chosen. With the number of playwrights in the world, that is an unfortunate reputation to develop.
|
|
The producer is always— always—the first to get frustrated and the last. |
|
Second Entry |
|
Copyright 2005-2009 Erik Sherman, All Rights Reserved |
