American Theatre: On the Real with Stephen Adly Guirgis and Chris Gabo
Okay, here’s a breakdown of the conversation, focusing on the key themes and points made by Stephen and Chris.
Core Discussion: The Economics & Practicality of Large-Cast plays in Contemporary Theatre
The central theme is the difficulty of getting large-cast plays produced in the current theatre landscape. They’re discussing the balance between artistic ambition (writng the play they want to write) and the realities of what theatres are willing and able to produce.
key Points & arguments:
* Cast Size & Understudies in Dog Day: Stephen provides a concrete example with Dog Day, mentioning a cast of 15 with 5 understudies. The captivating detail is the attempt to integrate understudies into the production,giving them onstage roles even when not covering a principal. This is a way to justify the larger cast and keep more actors employed.
* The Importance of Giving Actors Something to Do: Both agree strongly on this. Chris emphasizes that playwrights who ignore actors are making a strategic error. Happy, engaged actors are more likely to be involved and advocate for a play. He wants to create roles that allow actors to “shine” – to sing, dance, and have meaningful moments.
* Economics & risk: Chris is explicitly thinking about the economics. he asks about cast size to understand what’s “realistic” for the marketplace. He acknowledges that a play like Angels in America (a massive, landmark production) is unlikely to be taken on by a theatre for an unknown playwright.
* The Temptation of Small Casts: Chris admits the “smartest” move woudl be to write a two-hander with roles designed for celebrities, as those are easier to sell. Though, he’s resisting that impulse.
* The Fate of halfway Bitches Go Straight to Heaven: Stephen brings up halfway Bitches as a cautionary tale. It was a critically acclaimed play, but its large cast (18 + a goat!) makes it impractical for revival. This reinforces the idea that even good plays can be unproducible due to size.
* Taking the Swing: Chris ultimately decides to write the 10-hander (Hollywood & Gower) despite the challenges. He believes that if he doesn’t write the play he’s passionate about, he’ll regret it. He’s willing to take the risk, hoping someone will take a chance on it.
* Playwrights and Actors: Chris feels that some playwrights view actors as merely vessels for their work, which he finds unsustainable and “mad stupid.” He believes in valuing and respecting actors.
In essence, the conversation is a frank discussion about the compromises and challenges facing playwrights who want to create ambitious, large-scale work in a theatre world increasingly focused on financial viability and smaller casts. They are weighing artistic integrity against practical considerations.
Is there anything specific you’d like me to analyze further,or any particular aspect of the conversation you’re interested in?