Messages

1441

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: PROFESSIONALISM: What SMs Should/Should Not Say During Casting Process?

« on: Jan 30, 2010, 09:00 pm »

Why should the actor not be held to the same standards as the SM?

I guess it really comes down to how you view the job.  SM is just another job in the company?  That's not how I view my job - I am the day to day manager of the this group, and responsible for their work, their safety and how they interact with each other.  I don’t have the legal definition of manager, in that I hire/fire, but I do have many of the supervisory responsibilities of the cast and the crew

LCSM, I don’t disagree that the actor has a responsibility to bring a certain amount of professionalism to the table  [THAT IS PART OF THEIR JOB – AND I DON’T WANT TO EVER SAY AN ACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT] , but we are talking about creative, unique individuals that are not always on the best behavior – and as much as we want them to play nice together, there is almost always going to be some sort of friction – any group of people of working together – creative or not  - tend to have some issues. 

My style of stage management does take on those responsibilities – and although as a LORT Stage Manager, I am limited in my arsenal of weapons to help deal with some bad behavior.  I tend to deal with negative behavior in a variety of ways depending on the type of behavior.  I will make a casual conversation about the behavior, then make a more formal conversation about the issue.  Usually, in my conversation I will try to figure out the real cause of the behavior – sometimes it is quite frankly and simple the behavior and nothing else – but most of the time, to be honest, the behavior is acting out  because of something else – and my conversations can start us dealing with those issues.  Now, if my management can’t change the behavior, then I have to bump it up to HR or the Producer for us to come up with a plan of attack.  I have been in situations when the producers have backed me up, and have stepped in (sometimes to the point of letting that person go . . . ), and sadly, there have been times where the issue, indeed being bad and they agree with me, for a variety of reasons, upper management chose not to take additional steps.  At this point, my management style sort of goes into “make it work” mode – and depending on the situation, sort of goes into overdrive.

In my experience, one bad egg does can ruin a cast’s moral, and affects the final product.  Since I am charged with maintaining the product to a level the rest of the company is not, I am held to much higher standards.  I am not just another a member of the company, I am the leader, in many ways, of the group.

1442

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: PROFESSIONALISM: Have I overstepped the mark?

« on: Jan 29, 2010, 01:42 pm »

Side bar . . .

I work well with "difficult" actors/directors/designers/producers.

I want to find a word in the English language - that is demanding, perfectionist, particular, etc . . . but without the negative connotation - it would be so helpful in this biz.

1443

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: PROFESSIONALISM: Have I overstepped the mark?

« on: Jan 29, 2010, 09:11 am »

Okay, here's the 1000 pound gorilla in the room . . .

if an actor is difficult to work, has bad habits, etc . . . doesn't part of the blame fall of how that actor was MANAGED.  Isn't it fundamentally part of our job to decrease the bad behavior and increase the good behavior?  (Now, we have a limited arsenal in fighting bad behavior since we ultimately middle management, and if the producer doesn't back us up, we are often scrambling to figure out how to work around it.)  So, aren't we really saying, when we  bad mouth an actor's behavior is "I couldn't figure out a way to manage them?" or "I fail to manage them correctly".  I have had actors who "have been a terror to work with" in previous shows, and then ended up having no problem with them (same with directors), and the other way around.  It seems rather juvenile to past this all off on the actor.

Granted, there are limited things we can do to modify a bad actors behavior (indirect, passive aggressive, direct, etc . . . ) especially in the AEA LORT theater model - but you typically can elevate a problem to the next level up - and how upper management chooses to deal with it is up them - if they choose to ignore the issue, then you need to figure out to (let's quote Tim Gunn) "make it work".  (I find the magic bullet is to have my producer contact the actor's agent - and all seems to become amazingly better).

The real reason I would not pass on a "bad recommendation" to someone about their behavior is because ultimately, it would reflect negatively on me.  "I let this actor get out of control."  

My theory about stage management is you have to tailor your management style to each actor - figure out WHY an actor is doing a particular project, you can can figure out HOW to manege them.  Are they are a star doing it to spread their wings?  Are they desperate for the work?  Are they trying to get into a new theatre?  Is this their first job?  Are the desperate for the health care weeks?  There are some actors that were shafted in the contract negotiations.  WHAT EVER - but you can adjust the style around it.  I worked with "difficult" actor, that just plain had a different style then I had ever worked with before, and I found it taxing on the entire cast - but the realit of the situation was he didn't know any other way to work - so it was a bit of education for the cast and myself, but we got into a groove on how to all work together through some leadership.  Basically I think bad behavior is a symptom for another problem, and not always the disease itself.  By getting to know the actor, you get to know what is the real reason for the bad behavior and how to note it, and get it to stop.   Sometimes separate the issue from the actor can help as well.

Ultimately, the job of stage manager is about 10% technical theater, and 90% managing people (the good, the bad, the ugly, the difficult).  I think this is a prime example of that.

[Sorry about bad grammar - tech, let's use tech as the excuse today!]

1444

Tools of the Trade / Re: iPad: What do you think?

« on: Jan 28, 2010, 12:23 am »

I am note exactly sure who is this geared for - limted output/input control - Apple Store has complete control over software, awkward keyboard, can't multi-task . . . I am gong to wait to see whats happens in the second generation.

1445

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: PROFESSIONALISM: Have I overstepped the mark?

« on: Jan 27, 2010, 11:43 pm »

That's has happened a lot to me . . . where someone says "Oh this director is DIFFICULT to work with" - and I have no problem with them at all.  And some directors are "easy as pie to work with" - I actually had trouble with them

1446

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: PROFESSIONALISM: Have I overstepped the mark?

« on: Jan 27, 2010, 08:19 pm »

I think that the legality of the issue is what is most important - unless you know the legal laws of the state where you work, giving information other the dates of employment, reason for departure and if you would re-hire again - you are treading on thin ice.

1447

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: Have I overstepped the mark?

« on: Jan 27, 2010, 02:55 pm »

You should check with the laws for the state in which you work about giving a reference that is negative.  It does open up a can of worms.   If you work at theatre with a HR person, bend their ear, and they can give you more information.

I am always very clear when giving a reference on someone stating that I am giving it as a freelance stage manager and NOT a staff member at the theater I currently work. 

1448

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: Have I overstepped the mark?

« on: Jan 27, 2010, 08:48 am »

About notifying future employers, what if the shoe was on the other foot . . .

let's say there is given set of circumstances which is making it difficult for you to do your job fully - a bad assistant, a director who is difficult to work at, various production staff making your job harder, not enough budget - what ever reasons you aren't doing your job to the best of your abilities, legitimate reasons - and the actors may not be aware of all the mitigating circumstances behind your work.  An actor hears you are applying for another job and they go and bad mouth you to that producer - is that fair?  Is that right?  I would hate to be judge by any single production I have done . . . 

Every show is different, every production unique - even when you work with the same people over and over again.  In the USA, what you may have done - if this was a professional setting - borders on being questionably legal - I am pretty strictly bound on what I can say as reference to anyone's employer past, present or future.

1449

Students and Novice Stage Managers / Re: 2009/2010 Stage Management Internships for The Shakespeare Theatre Company

« on: Jan 22, 2010, 11:11 pm »

What I like to see is some sample calling pages, sample paperwork, ideally multiple items from one show, and then maybe some other items from various shows . . .

1450

Students and Novice Stage Managers / Re: 2009/2010 Stage Management Internships for The Shakespeare Theatre Company

« on: Jan 21, 2010, 03:57 pm »

I would consider it if you were already AEA, but you would understand it would be an education experience and position, and not under AEA guidelines.

1451

Students and Novice Stage Managers / Re: 2009/2010 Stage Management Internships for The Shakespeare Theatre Company

« on: Jan 21, 2010, 03:14 pm »

Looking forward to your application!

1452

The Green Room / Re: 10 things actors can do to get off to a good start with a stage manager

« on: Jan 14, 2010, 10:42 pm »

10) Do not tell me how to do my job. I'm a stage manager because I know theatre better than most, so the day that you want to tell me how to do my job properly, is the day you better be SMing a broadway production. PERIOD.

That seems a little harsh.

I am always looking for ways to do my job better, and don't mind input from other people.

Once I stop learning and adapting, I will think about retiring for this job.

And quite frankly, just because you are SM'ing on Broadway, doesn't mean your good.

1453

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: Anyone else using Google Sites?

« on: Jan 13, 2010, 10:59 pm »

I am always afraid of sites that people have to go to to get information, and much perfer to PUSH e-mails out information.

1454

The Hardline / Re: Half Hour Call

« on: Jan 11, 2010, 07:02 pm »

My only problem with staggering breaks like that is it's hard for my to track on big shows that SM, crew and all actors are getting breaks.  It's sometimes just best for everyone to take ten and then come back together.

I am the worse, and sometimes work hours before I cry foul and have to take a break.

1455

The Hardline / Re: Half Hour Call

« on: Jan 11, 2010, 11:46 am »

I have asked AEA about this multiple occasions, half-hour is considered work time, and has to be included in computing work time during rehearsal.

The best thing to do, to maximize time during tech periods where half-hour is given is the following:

1) Give them 30 minutes half-hour, take five, and then move on to your 80 minute work session.

2) Or, be very clear with the cast that during tech/rehearsal periods with costumes you will give then 25 minutes to get them into costume, then give them a five minute break, and then start.  Trust me, if you are working with any sort of "older/experience" actors, they will fight you on this . . . thinking the half-hour is all sorts of sacred - when in reality, the half-hour call is really just tied to a lot of rules around performance. 

As far as the AEA rules are concerned, there is no half-hour until you get to paid-public performances.  In reality, tech rehearsals are just normal rehearsals.  It's considered standard to give the cast 30 minutes to get into hair, costume and make-up, but in reality, if it only takes your actors 5 minutes then that's what you need to give them.  If you make it clear to the cast that your expectation is for them to get into hair, make-up and costume in 25 minutes, and then give them five minute break, and start 30 minutes after the call - then life goes on.  I usually announce at the top of the half-hour that I expect them to be ready in 30 minutes, plus take a five minute call - and then adjust the calls to to the break, announce the break, and then call them back.

Let us be honest, how many of us going down and check with actors in during half-hour during tech, to see actors sitting down, chatting until like ten minutes before they are expected onstage.  Usually, I have more the enough to do on stage during tech that I don't feel like I am losing time, but there has been techs were I have told the actors - ten minutes to get into costume ASAP, and we start on tech.

Now, if you are doing a run, or show, you only have to worry about the break at intermission, so it doesn't matter how long the it is between breaks.  (Like, my actors on my current show have 2 hours and 35 minutes from fight call thru half-hour to intermission).