That's a good point Kay - the working relationship between stage management and director does evolve throughout the process, and we do go very quickly from being somewhat equals into the room, to getting very nit picky notes from the other – and a smart director will establish that relationship during rehearsal. (I find part of my job when working with a new director, is figure out how he deals with challenges and frustrations, how he gives notes, what he cares about visually, etc . . . )
When I first read this Dear Abby post, I wanted to just write "To solve the issue, just call the show right". And leave it at that, which would solve the issue, right?
But there is a relationship issue here, and really, how the original poster needs to move forward really is based on their management style. And they should pick and chose from these responses what would work for them.
The best way to handle situations like this is to avoid them in the future. One of the things I would point out, when the SM came down proud of the show, and the director was upset, there is obviously a difference in opinion and priority and threshold for mistakes. Remember, a director sitting in the house has no idea WHY the cue is off - they may not know where you a call, if you called the cue correctly, or you miscalled, if the operator was late, if something mechanical went wrong, etc, etc, etc . . . so, they are completely helpless in something that can throw the show off. End of the day, so many directors hate tech because it is something they don't understand or can't control.
If we had a really rough show on the deck, and the ASM comes to me after the show and says, without any sarcasm, “Well, that was almost perfect backstage”, you have to understand that I would be a bit upset the ASM doesn't really have the whole picture.
I have taken coming down from the booth during previews and give my calling notes to the designers/directors – not waiting for them to give them to me.
"Lx 12, called late actor transposed lines, LX 14 - called a beat early (SM ERROR), QL for the Actor's entrance was thrown at the right time, Actors ignored and came on later. QUICK CHANGE got snagged up . . . " Everything that went wrong, I want them to know I noticed, I care and have a reason. It shows that I know that what you wanted was not executed. It takes some of the pressure of the director if I come down and go, "You know, this is where we are rough . . . "
If there are things that went wrong, that I didn't notice, then we know where, for example, I am not watching the light cues SR because of the automation Upstage Left I have to watch. It helps the director learn how I call the show.
This also does something interesting. What is LX 14, which I think was called early, everyone likes in the new position. During notes, you wouldn't get a note about it's placement, but you know you need to fix it, and call it correctly the next time, but the designer would be upset.
Perhaps, more tech time needs to be taken. I think a lot of the time I have trouble calling a sequence is because I didn't tech it correctly. If I continue to have trouble, then I will schedule time to retech.
The other issue is that there is crew who are not taking cues correctly, and the fact you are doing more then just calling the show complicates everything. These may be a bigger issues that you need to get producers on board with. Is this the right operator? Do you have too much to do? How can we re-tech this so the show can be run 100% correctly, eight times a week.
Like lighting designers, stage managers have to learn and execute their work in the room, live, quickly and with an amazing amount accuracy. And you have to learn how to do that, with a level detail that will allow you to work at the level you want to work, with the style you want to work with.
Show Posts