Messages

166

Employment / Re: When is enough enough

« on: Oct 17, 2008, 06:35 am »

Should a "job" be fun?  (Again, this is not about me personally, but I don't think it is particularly "fun" anymore - there are times I have a good time at work.)

Not all jobs need to be fun.  But given the long hours, low pay, and general amount of junk we need to deal with as SMs and thespians, I think that yes, you do need to have fun working in theater, or it’s not worth it.  The fun, the buzz, the love, whatever you want to call it, if you don’t feel it, it may be time to get out of this business.

Like so many other things, when to call it quits is different from each individual.  When the cons out weight the pros, I should think, but each of us needs to make that tally for ourselves.  And when making that list, it’s important to consider whether it’s the profession or the current situation that’s problematic.

167

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: Gratuitious Paperwork

« on: Aug 30, 2008, 08:54 pm »

Better to take the ten minutes in pre-rehearsal prep week, when you have it, than ten minutes in tech week, when you're near to pulling out your hair!

I sometimes create document templates during prep week that I don’t end up using for a particular show, but those are usually just “save as” from a previous production, so at least I haven’t spent a lot of time on them. 

However I am guilty of spending entirely too much time trying to pick the perfect font or fix a logo alignment issue in my document headers.  Since I know I’m going to waste time on this, I try to play around with it before prep week if I can, and once it’s done I’ll use the header for the whole run, so it feels worth it to me, even though it’s not something I really need to do.  If I didn’t have a computer, I’d be content to just type the show name and theater name in Arial on everything, and leave it at that.   

Rehearsal run sheets/scene by scene tracking documents are the only paperwork  that I really debate with myself about.  You need clear information to do run throughs in the rehearsal space, and in a complex show carrying your binder, or flipping back and forth between scribbled notebook pages as you move props/costumes SL/SR isn’t always possible.  Plus, if others are helping to do rehearsal run throughs, but they’ve been on book or something else the rest of the time, a printed guide is certainly helpful.  On the other hand, spending time formatting and updating docs that will quickly become obsolete when you move to the stage doesn’t  make a lot of sense, so lately I’ve been trying to simplify these things as much as possible.  A case where yes, tracking things is good, but I'm not sure using computer tracking is always the best method. 

168

The Hardline / Re: Trying to explain LORT scheduling rules to actors

« on: Aug 30, 2008, 08:21 pm »

You must be given 12-hour notice of the span of the next day.  (Although there is no rule about when the schedule needs to be broken down.)

You may want to spell out here that rehearsal hours are not set in stone, and can change or be set with as little as 12 hours notice.   Some of the scheduling questions may stem from actors trying to fit in other commitments, so it could be helpful for them to know that unless they have a pre-approved conflict, they need to be fully available for the show every day except the Designated Day Off.  Also, you might want to make "broken down" a little clearer.  I know what you mean, I'm not sure how it reads to actors. 
 
Plenty of theaters have rehearsal spaces and even stages that are in such high demand,  we have a firm rehearsal schedule from the beginning, with few adjustments made day to day, even though the AEA contract would allow them.  If your actors come from these types of situations, and haven’t read the rule books, they may simply not realize how fluid the schedule is allowed to be, so your cheat sheet will be an eye-opener for them.

169

Employment / Re: Stage Management Salary

« on: Jul 20, 2008, 03:32 pm »

  There is no constant, and taking a salary cut (that tiny contract) in return for health weeks is enough of a draw to choose that work. So sometimes I work as an SM exclusively, and sometimes I have a day job. And yes, as we all do, I always work many more hours than the contract allows and usually don't get OT.

Me too.  When I get questions about salary, I usually remind people that Stage Managers have much the same lifestyle as actors.  Sometimes work is plentiful and well-paid, other times not so much.   I would add that I  feel like SMs have less leverage for negotiating higher pay than an actor might.  Theaters may like you and appreciate the vital role a good SM plays through entire production process, but we are invisible.  It’s a harder sell to get them to spend more money on an SM, when it means spending less on the actors, props, and costumed, which are actually seen.

170

Articles from the Old Site / Re: Unpaid/Underpaid Positions

« on: Jul 20, 2008, 03:23 pm »

I wish “the industry” would treat AEA minimums as what they are, rather than acting as though they are the standard salary.  When you have more than the minimum experience, you should get more than the minimum salary, yet I’ve often found that the burden is on the SM to justify even the smallest increase.   Complicating this is that, especially in SPT theater, they may simply not have the budget to go above a certain point financially, for anyone.  Being a talented and well-liked SM will indeed get you hired, but it won’t always get you more money, and it’s not necessarily because anyone wants to take advantage of you.  Not taking the low paying jobs may have too high a price when you love the challenges of SMing the new plays and intimate productions that smaller theaters are more likely to produce.  If your goal is to work on the large scale classics and big budget musicals that the big budget theaters are putting on, you may find there are fewer companies working at that level, and more competition for their SM slots.

171

Tools of the Trade / Re: Management Books

« on: May 01, 2008, 08:37 pm »

The title is cheesy and it may not be as general as you’re looking for, but “The Girl’s Guide to Being a Boss (without being a bitch)” by Caitlin Friedman and Kimberly Yorio has good insights, was written recently, and is very readable (so you’ve got a shot at your interns getting through it without too many groans).  It’s not aimed at theater, but it talks a lot about managing personalities in a work setting, which is a lot of what stage managing is about.  Though it’s written with a by women, for women slant, I think men might learn a few things too by looking at management from a new perspective.

172

Employment / Re: Stepping In

« on: Apr 10, 2008, 12:52 pm »

I’ve been in that situation several times, and I list it as Production Stage Manager with “Take-Over” in parentheses under it.  Or PSM with an asterisk, and a corresponding note saying it was a take-over (or whatever word you choose). That might work well if you’re low on space on your resume. 

Personally, I’d stay away from “Calling SM” in this situation, since that sort of sounds like there is another SM floating around somewhere who deals with other aspects of the show, when really all problems are your problems at this point.  “Temporary” would be weird, too, since you are the only contracted PSM for the show once the original SM is gone, regardless of the length of the engagement. 

173

The Hardline / Re: Distribution Actor Notes

« on: Apr 08, 2008, 06:36 pm »

I've had actors who love getting notes via e-mail because it gives them plenty of time to digest the notes before the next performance or rehearsal.

And I've had actors who hate the same practice. 

I don’t mind notes being sent by email, as long as hard copy is available at the theater as well, since the actor has the option then of reading the note at home or at work, whatever suits them.

My concern is more about all notes being given to all actors, and whether the Equity rules actually do prohibit this (after opening).  If Kate sees the note about Mary and Jake’s fight when she’s not involved with any of their scenes, is that allowable according to the book, as long as it’s via email and not on the callboard?  If Mary is uncomfortable with Kate seeing her notes (by email), does Mary have Equity backing to complain about it, or is she out of luck since the rules don’t cover email?   

174

Tools of the Trade / Re: Headset Side

« on: Apr 08, 2008, 06:14 pm »

I’ll wear it on either side.  It depends on what I want to hear...or not hear.  If I’m in a booth, for instance, and the monitor speaker is to my left, I may wear my headset on the right so I can hear the monitor better.  But sometimes the monitor is too loud, so I’d put the headset on my monitor side. 

175

The Hardline / Distribution Actor Notes

« on: Mar 31, 2008, 06:57 pm »

I’ve read in the SPT and LORT books that individual actor notes (after opening) may not be posted openly on the callboard.  How do we define “individual actor notes?”  Would it be ok for a director to email a set of notes to the entire cast, with a scene by scene listing of notes, some pertaining to more than one actor, but some that apply only to one actor?  I tend to think this would go against the spirit of the rule, and that the director should break out their notes by person  and give them only to the actor they apply to, but maybe there is a loophole here.   Thoughts?       

176

SMNetwork Archives / Re: Disease Prevention Techniques

« on: Mar 31, 2008, 12:05 am »

If you or someone in your production are seriously ill/contagiously sick…stay home, and see a doctor.  I know it’s easier said than done, but that’s why God made understudies and Stage Managers make paperwork.  Don’t tough it out at work at the expense of other people’s health.  Sick people at work are likely to infect others in the company, and will probably be less productive than usual anyway.  Plus it’s just plain depressing to watch someone suffer through rehearsal  when they should clearly be home in bed.

177

Stage Management: Plays & Musicals / Re: sound cue debate - letters or numbers

« on: Mar 20, 2008, 12:41 pm »

Have you asked the Sound Designer why he doesn’t want to switch to letters?  You may be swayed, or at least learn something, from his answer (although if he’s already annoyed about this he may not give you a true response).  Many designers work on several shows at once, so what seems like a short, simple project to you may feel like a larger burden to him.  If you were working with a lighting designer who liked to call her Qs as “electrics,” would you ask that they change the Q names to “lights,” instead, because that’s what you’re used to? Just something to ponder.     

178

The Hardline / Re: Who Locks Your Doors?

« on: Jan 30, 2008, 12:34 pm »

I'm not sure what other contracts say, but in an SPT contract, SMs are specifically forbidden from opening or locking up the theater.
Granted, often it makes the most sense for the SM to do it anyway, since they are usually the first in and the last out, but it's food for thought.

The SPT rule is phrased in a pretty hard core way, but there are still loopholes.  At one of the theaters I work at, SMs help with security.  The last person out of the building (which includes offices and rehearsal rooms, not just the stage) walks through it to see that all lights are off and interior doors are locked, that sort of thing, then sets the security alarm on their way out.  However, the SM is never responsible for opening or locking the exterior doors to the building.  The doors are automatically locked and staff use a code to get in.  They are magically unlocked for patrons for the few hours just before, during, and after a performance (I don’t know if House Management does this, or if they’re on some kind of timer). 

I think this is a reasonable arrangement, since I can come and go at anytime, and the book does not talk about lights and security alarms and non-theater doors. I could choose not to unlock the theater itself, and instead take the long way around to backstage or the booth, or ask someone else to unlock that one door for me, but that just seems silly since we all have the same key and I'm standing right there.  I also like to think this rule is in part designed to protect SMs from being responsible for patron access to the building/house, and the SMs in this situation have nothing to do with that.

179

Students and Novice Stage Managers / Re: Help? Running board and Lights...

« on: Jan 09, 2008, 10:09 am »

I will be running a 2 scene light board and it's such a huge hassle.

I have my tabs telling me what cue it is (In my prompt book), and I have a cue sheet with all of the channels and numbers

It might make sense to put the channel information directly into your script, so that you don’t have to look back and forth between the script and a cue sheet, and risk loosing your place or setting up the wrong channels in the process.  If you have the text on one side of your script, with Qs written in the margin, you could use the back of the facing page for this.  Even if you write your Qs on the facing page, you could probably move them close to the binder rings and have enough room for channel info.  Anything you can do to put all the info you need to complete a particular sequence in one spot, in sequential order, without extraneous info surrounding it, will be helpful.  I’d even write out all the steps for myself  (ex:  CD Track 10, Channels X, Y, Z at 50%, vol up for CD, look up and watch slap, then check Master fader is up on lights …take Q on arm drop), since the more your run the show the better you’ll understand where the challenges are and how to work efficiently.  Just like a backstage run sheet would be very detailed and improve over time.  If putting the info in your script doesn’t work, maybe an index card for each script page or sequence, with both lights and sound on it, or one for each, would work.  I’d personally just be very worried about accurately translating the channel sheet to the board during a busy sequence…so many numbers….so little light. 

180

The Hardline / Re: Cleaning the greenroom

« on: Dec 30, 2007, 02:47 pm »

However, it's one thing to take this responsibility on yourself and another for the theatre to tell you that it's YOUR responsibility.

I agree. Requiring the SM to clean the greenroom sure seems like a violation of rule 63 to me.

Maybe you can suggest that the theater pay a small additional fee to someone on the cast or crew to get them to do a daily clean-up. In that case, I wouldn’t have a problem checking that the arranged-for cleaning is actually taking place.  Every theater I’ve worked at has a custodial crew or maintenance staff that deal with vacuuming, sweeping, and mopping the greenroom and dressing room, but often they are not required to clean up kitchen sinks, counters, tables, etc (and we probably wouldn’t want them to; they could end up throwing out food props). 

That said, I often find myself wiping crumbs off the counter, loading the dishwasher, throwing out Starbucks cups, and trashing the suspicious cheese that’s been in the fridge for three weeks.  I do those things not because it is my job to do them, but because the greenroom is my living room, and I want to do my part to keep it livable.  Everyone has different standards of acceptable cleanliness, though, and with a large cast, even if they are generally responsible and well meaning, things can easily get out of hand.

Asking you to deal with the bug problem sounds way over the line to me.  That’s like asking you to call the plumber or the locksmith; it’s a problem with the physical building, not the production you’re hired to work on.