Here is the fifth in a series of interviews devoted to people involved in the new play development sector. On Deck: Jason Loewith, Executive Director of the National New Play Network (NNPN). Previous interviews include: Philip Himberg, Polly Carl, Todd London, Wendy C. Goldberg.
Vijay Mathew: Why does the Network exist? What challenges does the NNPN address in the field?
Jason Loewith: We're the country's leading alliance of non-profit theatres that champions the development, production, and continued life of new plays. We are hoping to change the way the field thinks about and defines world premieres. That's the primary motivation behind our flagship program, the Continued Life of New Plays Fund. We want to provide an alternative to traditional new play processes, and the way new plays get in front of patron communities around the country.
We've heard a lot of talk in the field about this thing called “World Premiere-it is”. Playwrights are in a real bind. Many theatres only want to produce plays that have never been done before. They don't want to do the second production because they believe somehow the second or third production of the play is not saleable. So playwrights get into a very difficult situation - if a young playwright is lucky enough to have a relatively small theatre do their play, no big theatre may want to do it – especially if the reviews aren’t stellar. A more established playwright may immediately be put into the crucible of New York, where reviews can kill a play first time out.
What the Continued Life of New Plays Fund does is put together a consortia of three theaters that commit to doing the same new play within a single year before the first rehearsal of any of those three productions. We provide a stipend to defray the expenses of the new play, a substantial but not insignificant amount of money. We give over $6,000.00 to each of those three theatres to encourage their collaboration and to help cure World Premiere-itis.
The result – a “rolling world premiere” - gives the playwright three productions within a year: three opportunities to make changes with three completely different artistic teams, three sets of reviews, and three royalty checks. This is a not a co-production, these are three completely different artistic teams working on a show and three completely different patron communities looking and responding to this new work.
The process a) makes the play better because the playwright has three opportunities to work on it, and b)) it gives the playwright three shots at great reviews (because, you know, god forbid your show opens in New York and Ben Brantley had bad clams that night, or your leading actress had a migraine). You’ve got three opportunities now, outside of New York, for your play to get an interesting set of reviews, and the play gets more momentum to be produced elsewhere.
Today in the New York Times there was a big article about Zayd Dohrn and his play "Sick" which is getting done at the Berkshire Theatre Festival. Well, this play "Sick" was a Continued Life of New Plays Fund and NNPN play. The article says "the play has already been done in Dallas, New Orleans, and New Jersey". Those were three NNPN theatres that did it because they learned about it through the network, and teamed up with each other through the Continued Life of New Plays Fund. And now – thanks in part to their work on it – the play is getting an even more visible production. I call that success. Zayd Dohrn has now had three opportunities to work on his play and to make it better. He has received royalties for three productions. We all know that playwrights make so little money off of their plays, so they are all desperate to get that single shot at the right World Premiere… and God forbid, it doesn't go well, five years of work goes down the tubes with one royalty check. With the model that NNPN is promoting, he gets three shots to give the play the momentum it needs.
Vijay Mathew: Could you explain what World Premiere-itis is, and who is afflicted with it?
Jason Loewith: [Chuckles] The entire field is afflicted with it. Playwrights get less money because of it, and communities are deprived of new work because of it.
World Premieritis is territorialism in an otherwise collaborative field. A playwright has written a great play, and his friends at small theater X want to do it. But meanwhile, giant regional theater Y tells him that a production is possible but they need more time to consider it. In the system as it stands, that playwright will wait months or years until that giant regional theater passes. Meanwhile, small theater X has moved on.
Or maybe giant regional theater Y does it, and then holds up the rights to subsequent productions hoping for Broadway or a commercial tour. More years go by. And still, small theater X can’t do the play, and the community around small theater X doesn’t have an opportunity to experience the work.
And sometimes, giant regional theater Y does it, and then giant regional theater Z (or even small theater X) won’t do the play because they’re only interested if they can call it a “World Premiere”!
Needless to say, this is frustrating and economically unfair to playwrights. This is a condition that afflicts playwrights and theatres, and then ultimately our entire theatre-going community, because a playwright who writes a new play is stymied, and forced to make production choices that aren’t in the script’s best interests..
Vijay Mathew: What is the power dynamic between the large theatres and the mid to small-sized theaters?
Jason Loewith: NNPN was founded in part in 1998 in reaction to more powerful theatres who were holding up the rights to plays and making it impossible for exciting, vibrant voices to get seen in their communities. NNPN was formed to say to agents and playwrights, "Look, here is an entire network of companies who have great expertise in new plays, are committed to taking risks, and who are willing to look at your work and do plays. Do we really need to wait until some giant theatre decides two years down the line that they actually don't want to do the play?" We are trying to provide an alternative to the kind of territorial culture that makes it so hard for good, risky World Premieres to come to the stage.
Vijay Mathew: What is the desired outcome after a play has its three or more productions? After its Rolling World Premieres?
Jason Loewith: Hopefully the play is better, hopefully the playwright has extra money in his or her pocket and most importantly, that the play has attained some sort of momentum. Our first Continued Life of New Plays Fund project was "Permanent Collection" by Tom Gibbons. That play had five productions as part of its Rolling World Premiere in 2003-04, and it has now been done over 25 times around the world. Tom is not going to retire on that money, but he’s done quite well on it. That's the kind of production roster a working playwright needs to survive in this country. There is no doubt that the Rolling World Premiere led to those other productions, created the momentum in terms of reviews, in terms of artists in the field getting to know about the work. You know, one subscriber says to a friend of theirs in another city, "Hey! You know, I saw this amazing play. You should think about it, you know, you should ask your theatre about it." And here’s the biggest surprise: the play has not been done in New York. Tom didn’t have to be put through the New York Times wringer, which can be very difficult for a playwright, and still got to audiences around the country through the network’s efforts. That’s the outcome we hope for with the Continued Life of New Plays Fund.
Vijay Mathew: Why is it that most of the 26 NNPN member theaters are small to mid-sized?
Jason Loewith: Their annual budgets range in size from $150,000.00 to almost $4 million, from SPTs on up to LORTs.. But why is it small and mid-sized theatres? I think it's part of the ethos of the founding of the organization.
It was founded by a producer and philanthropist named David Goldman, who is still very much involved. He saw that this as-yet-unlinked cohort of theatres devoted to risk and new plays could provide an exciting avenue for this Continued Life experiment to work. And for obvious reasons, it was a lot more likely that this experiment was going to work if the membership were made up of the smaller, more risk-embracing theaters, rather than larger regional flagships that do only one new play each year. Those theaters, of necessity, are more risk-averse, and need to program a wide variety of works for their communities. For the most part, though, our members are theaters who will program a slate of 50 to 100% new plays in their seasons. They’re known for that work in their communities, and they’re small enough to be nimble in programming and production. So these are the kind and size of theatres that are extremely committed to the health of the new play ecosystem in the country – it’s vital to their very existence.
Vijay Mathew: What are your near-term plans for the NNPN?
Jason Loewith: We are now creating partnerships with different parts of the new play universe with whom we don’t yet have links. Links to those large regional theatres that maybe do one new play a year, or that others like Actor’s Theatre of Louisville or South Coast Rep that sponsor major festivals of new plays. I’m also interested in small theatres that speak to specific communities of writers like Golden Thread in San Francisco which has deep roots in the middle-eastern writing community, or theatres that specialize in disability stories, for example. And then there are standalone festivals, new play prizes, and new play development organizations. I agree with what David Dower said, that there are more resources and more opportunities for new plays in this country now than there ever have been before. But I fear the parts aren’t talking to each other. And NNPN can play a role in starting the conversation.
With such an enormous number of opportunities for new plays, why are there not many better new plays on stage across the country? What are we as a field doing wrong? Why are we squandering our resources in replication? Why do we hear so frequently that new plays are relegated to the nine rings of workshop hell? Or worse, why are new plays coming to the stage that are so frequently half baked, what with all the development processes around?
Vijay Mathew: How will the NNPN address these quality challenges?
Jason Loewith: We’re trying to eliminate some of the replication and increase the amount of communication amongst these parts of the new play field. And you know, when you pool all this expertise, you can begin solving some of these problems. One of the remarkable things about NNPN that I was just so blown away by, was the fact that its members have managed to surmount the territoriality that does so much damage to the new play processes in this country. The fact that a bunch of theatres would say, "You know what, it's okay if I don't get sole World Premiere credit."
Vijay Mathew: Since the beginning of NNPN, how has the field changed? Has there been a shift in the way that theaters (New York, regional, or otherwise) think about new work?
Jason Loewith: The field is changing in a number of ways. One, our programs are being replicated in different places around the country. Two, the awareness of World Premiere-it is has reached a tipping point. It’s finally become accepted around the country as a challenge to address. That’s why funders are so interested in maintaining and supporting programs that promote the health of the new play ecosystem. The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation has devoted money in the past couple of grant cycles to organizations that are looking for innovative ways to solve the problems facing new plays and playwrights. So I think there is a great deal more awareness in the country and I'm hopeful that there is more interest and communication and collaboration… that's very good for us in the network, and in the field as a whole.
Recent Comments