Advanced Search | Search All That Chat


ATC Rush/Standing Room LOGIN REGISTER THREADED MODE

Threaded Order Chronological Order
re: Poor Joseph Stein
Posted by: Chromolume 07:57 pm EST 12/19/15
In reply to: re: Poor Joseph Stein - sf 07:20 pm EST 12/19/15
ryhog: The book of the musical includes its detailed stage directions, and those directions have to be changed (i.e., not followed religiously).

sf: That's a stretch, and you know it.

It IS a huge stretch. For better or for worse, directors (and actors) are taught generally not to worry about printed stage directions. Obviously there are times when they NEED to be paid attention to (crucial plot points, etc), and I personally think they should be read before they are ignored, simply so one get an idea of what was originally intended. But to be followed religiously? Whether one thinks they should be or should be, they often aren't.
reply to this message
Stage directions
Posted by: KingSpeed 09:25 pm EST 12/19/15
In reply to: re: Poor Joseph Stein - Chromolume 07:57 pm EST 12/19/15
It is my understanding that most scripts' stage directions are that of the original's stage manager's notes.
reply to this message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: AlanScott 01:26 am EST 12/20/15
In reply to: Stage directions - KingSpeed 09:25 pm EST 12/19/15
If you see, say, a Samuel French script that is full of very specific staging notes, including SR and SL indications and so on, then that is a script that almost surely is taken at least in part from the stage manager's script.

But many published scripts have stage directions that are really the authors'. Some of them incorporate certain specific things from an original production's staging, but judiciously edited.

The published script of Fiddler does not include the kind of detailed stage directions that you see in certain acting-edition scripts — more so in ones from the past, I think, than in the present. But even in the past, certain authors did not allow those kinds of stage directions in the acting editions of their plays.

Looking through some old acting editions I have, it can be really tough to know which stage directions were in the script that the author wrote before the production went into rehearsal, which come right from the stage manager's script, and which ones the playwright added later to the script for publication, based on things that were done in the original production. Sometimes it's quite obvious, but a lot of the time it's not. At least not to me.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: ryhog 10:30 am EST 12/20/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - AlanScott 01:26 am EST 12/20/15
re timing

I don't understand why this matters in relation to the grant of rights. (I understand the historical interest.) Many/most new plays have changes in dialogue, directions etc added during rehearsal, during previews and sometimes even later. And the last signoff on every publication is the author's.

That said, high profile productions do not necessarily start with the published script, nor do they deal with the publisher as lesser productions do. Regardless, the version to be performed (or at least a change outline) is communicated to the author's representative (or in some cases the author comes in to give approval as was the case presumably with Harnick).

The comment I made related to the legal standard, and it is straightforward. People often have difficulty wrapping their heads around intellectual property rights, but it is easier, sometimes to think in tangible property contexts because the bottom line is the same. If I own a parcel of land, you might trespass on it with impunity enroute to somewhere, assuming it won't matter to me. But if and when it does matter to me, you will have to stop. The reason producers with a lot on the line are foolish to assume is because the consequences can be a lot worse than just readjusting your travel route.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: AlanScott 06:06 pm EST 12/20/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - ryhog 10:30 am EST 12/20/15
I think you meant that post as a response to someone else.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: ryhog 10:30 pm EST 12/20/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - AlanScott 06:06 pm EST 12/20/15
no but that's ok.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: AlanScott 11:15 pm EST 12/20/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - ryhog 10:30 pm EST 12/20/15
If you did intend it as a reply to my post, then I'm really puzzled.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: ryhog 11:30 pm EST 12/20/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - AlanScott 11:15 pm EST 12/20/15
Any day I can puzzle you is a good day :-)

My post was really cumulative of several, and I think my focus was not the same as yours. (I was talking about legalities and you were talking about how published scripts evolve.) My reference to "timing" was simply intended to mean that regardless of how a script evolves to its published form (whether an acting edition or otherwise), the author has to sign off on it, so to say it is the SM's version ought not be read as suggesting it is some outlier from what the author sanctioned.

As I said (I think) earlier in this thread, some authors care deeply about how their work is presented, and others simply don't. In America, in the theatre (close to uniquely), it's a wild kingdom when it comes to scripts and the control of what transpires on a stage.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: AlanScott 12:16 am EST 12/21/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - ryhog 11:30 pm EST 12/20/15
Well, I did start to think "ryhog intends this as a cumulative post, not a specific response to mine," but still it was puzzling since, as you say, my focus and your focus were rather different.

Another thing to remember: It was by no means uncommon at one time, and may still happen sometimes, for a version of a script published in hardcover (or sometimes in paperback) to differ from the acting edition. Sometimes the differences were merely in terms of there being stage directions in the acting edition that were not in the edition meant for a more general readership, but also sometimes in dialogue and other elements.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: ryhog 01:01 am EST 12/21/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - AlanScott 12:16 am EST 12/21/15
very true. Also remember that no matter what script a producer approaches a licensing office about, the rights are going to be granted on the version the rightsholder wants performed. And also also understand that no Bway production contract is negotiated by the producer calling Samuel French, DPS or the like.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Stage directions
Posted by: StageDoorJohnny 05:33 am EST 12/20/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - AlanScott 01:26 am EST 12/20/15
two older era authors who did write their stage directions were James Barrie and GB Shaw. Indeed, Barrie's stage directions are almost as much fun as his plays
And where today's authors may be careful to insist on the gender of the actor playing a role, or a specific setting for their play (Beckett for sure) I've never heard of a case of someone being sued for not following stage directions -- in fact a theater in Connecticut is being sued now for essentially lifting a production, sets, costumes AND blocking from Hartford Stage. If I do a show in 3/4 thrust or in the round, how do I follow stage directions?
reply to this message | reply to first message
Shaw, O'Neill, Barrie
Posted by: AlanScott 06:39 pm EST 12/20/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - StageDoorJohnny 05:33 am EST 12/20/15
It's generally clear with such authors as Shaw, O'Neill and Barrie that the stage directions come from them. They often go far beyond simple descriptions of sets in terms of where, say, the fireplace should be in relation to the door to the hallway and the door to the study, into . . . well, I don't have to tell any of you the kinds of things you find in their stage directions.

I remember someone, maybe Mordden, talking about how Mielziner got huge praise for his scenic effects for Me and Juliet, and some of the critics seemed to think that the ideas came from him. The ideas came from Hammerstein. Mielziner made them happen onstage, but they were in Hammerstein's head first.

Unfortunately, of course, they were the best things about that particular show.

Some of the lawsuits in recent years have seemed a tad odd to me given the history of acting editions. Not all of them, but that Love! Valour! Compassion! suit seemed odd to me given that for so long it was common for acting editions to include not only detailed stage directions based on what was done in the original production but even floor plans and prop lists. Certainly the message given for decades was that it was not only OK to copy a Broadway or London production, it was expected. Things have changed, but it's not surprising that the director in Florida (Michael Hall, not the actor) may well have thought that it was perfectly fine for him to borrow ideas used in Mantello's production.

I don't have a copy of the licensed script, but the lawyer quoted in the linked article says that the elements over which Mantello sued were in the licensed script. I'd guess that they no longer are in the licensed script. I think Manello's beef should have been with McNally and Dramatists, not with Hall and the Caldwell
Link Settled out of court
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Shaw, O'Neill, Barrie
Posted by: Michael_Portantiere 08:19 pm EST 12/20/15
In reply to: Shaw, O'Neill, Barrie - AlanScott 06:39 pm EST 12/20/15
I happened to see that Florida production of L!V!C!, which was not long after the Broadway production, and my impression -- even before the lawsuit was filed -- was that they copied the Broadway production down to the minutest details, including specific blocking, interpretations of the roles, and even facial expressions and line readings. I assume that was the issue, rather than recreation of the floor plan and props list.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Shaw, O'Neill, Barrie
Posted by: AlanScott 12:53 am EST 12/21/15
In reply to: re: Shaw, O'Neill, Barrie - Michael_Portantiere 08:19 pm EST 12/20/15
Part of it, according to the news reports at the time, was the use of the model house, which Mantello said was his idea, but which I'm guessing is (or at least was) mentioned in the acting edition.

Anyway, there are a lot of articles online about the specifics of the case, none of which probably get quite as specific as you and I might prefer.
reply to this message | reply to first message
O'Neill
Posted by: showtunetrivia 10:53 am EST 12/20/15
In reply to: re: Stage directions - StageDoorJohnny 05:33 am EST 12/20/15
A few years ago, the Neo-Futurists did an entire show based on the incredibly detailed stage directions in O'Neill's early plays.

Laura
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: O'Neill
Posted by: ryhog 11:05 am EST 12/20/15
In reply to: O'Neill - showtunetrivia 10:53 am EST 12/20/15
It was fun. I think they actually did a second play with more of them (that I didn't see).
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Poor Joseph Stein
Posted by: ryhog 08:06 pm EST 12/19/15
In reply to: re: Poor Joseph Stein - Chromolume 07:57 pm EST 12/19/15
i agree it is what everyone is taught but legally (and this is what's going on here) the authors hold ALL the cards. That's only an issue in high profile situations, but Broadway is as high as it gets.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Poor Joseph Stein
Posted by: Chromolume 08:32 pm EST 12/19/15
In reply to: re: Poor Joseph Stein - ryhog 08:06 pm EST 12/19/15
So, every major Broadway revival of any given show has either used all the original staging as recorded in the script, and/or they have sought permission from the authors or estate to change things? Somehow I have this feeling there have been LOADS of exceptions to this. I think authors often "look the other way" and/or ore open to other interpretations, and I certainly don't think that anyone expects stage directions to ever be followed to the letter anyway.

Yes, Robbins' choreography is supposed to be used in certain shows. Yes, I know there are playwrights like Albee who like to take control of major productions. Yes, there are estate owners who are known to be careful caretakers (I used to think Jo Sullivan was one, but the McAnuff How To Succeed and Guys And Dolls make me think otherwise) - but I really don't think that many authors/estates/rightsholders are quite as rigid as you think.
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Poor Joseph Stein
Posted by: ryhog 10:06 pm EST 12/19/15
In reply to: re: Poor Joseph Stein - Chromolume 08:32 pm EST 12/19/15
No, and I didn't say that. What I did say, and what folks need to understand, is that the authors have this power. Some wield big bats; some don't give a damn. But in general on broadway shows, either the authors or their agents and executors are engaged in the process (just as Harnick obviously was here) so that any potential issues can be resolved before the stakes are too high. To be clear, I was not suggesting that all or even many rights holders are extremely rigid but it behooves every producer sitting on millions of dollars of investment to confirm that there is not going to be an unpleasant surprise at a very bad time. And regarding script changes, anyone who changes something without sending a copy of the proposed changes to the rights holder or agent-and this is true at any level-is just nuts. (And yes I know there are many people in our business who are nuts. :-))
reply to this message | reply to first message
re: Poor Joseph Stein
Posted by: Chromolume 10:15 pm EST 12/19/15
In reply to: re: Poor Joseph Stein - ryhog 10:06 pm EST 12/19/15
And yes I know there are many people in our business who are nuts. :-)

Never would have thought that, lol. ;-)
reply to this message | reply to first message


All That Chat is intended for the discussion of theatre news and opinion
subject to the terms and conditions. (Please take all off-topic discussion to private email.)

Please direct technical questions/comments to webmaster@talkinbroadway.com and policy questions to TBAdmin@talkinbroadway.com.



Time to render: 0.248203 seconds.