Where to begin 2: Making the list

In the first entry, I tried to think about the circumstances of designing a show. Next is a gestation period before actually beginning to work on the design itself.

My best designs and design experiences have happened when I've given the play a thoughtful reading very early, 6 months or more before the design is due. Then the "ism" discussion can happen with the director. Kind of like that show but more of a feel of this show. Did you see X? What did you think? Have you seen the new exhibit at the ICA? I was watching Y on TV a month ago, and I really liked the sense of (space, time, era, line, shadow, texture, spirit, anger, joy, etc.). Et cetera. This often involves exchanges of references, articles and images with the director. This is the practice of what is sometimes called "organizing" whereby these exchanges help the participants imagine the same possibilities.

Sometimes things have to move much more quickly. Even in the regular season the time frame is tighter and conversations are more deliberate, more specific. The show has been selected, and there are reasons for the choice. There's less time for this give-and-take. The calendar drives the schedule and the director gets to set the tone by herself. That's still a good experience if the rapport is good, the director leads well and is open to suggestions. In that situation, the discussion usually moves directly to style and statement.

This can be exciting if I'm prepared. Usually, there is an early hint, "I'm thinking period" or "think 'Blue Angel'" or "go blackbox minimal". There also usually is a shared knowledge of contextual circumstances that influence a choice - the times, the talent, the artistic environment, an opportunity to work with certain people, a connection to current events. But when we talk, I MUST have done my own analysis of the script or it won't be a discussion. It will be a specification, and I'll be embarrassed.

Then what? I think this is where design approaches diverge. It also will tend to vary by show. For me it is two more readings: one through the lens of the discussion with the director, and one for the scenic action outline. I put some effort into that outline. I make it very specific, because it becomes the basis for a requirements list.

As we work on a show, we are constantly building a fragmented requirements list - what the action requires, and what the stage effect should be. But I wasn't writing it down in any systematic way, leading to omissions, unchallenged compromises and missed opportunities.

It took me a long time to get around to the fact that life is so much easier if you actually create a written requirements list. I wasn't taught this and I don't know if anybody but me teaches this. I picked it up as a necessity for lighting design, after working with architects on renovation projects. I teach it now, but students rarely want to write it out.

Scenemaker
January 21, 2011

Next: Creating the design.