Roundtable 2: Literary Managers - Gatekeepers or Yes Men?
Channel: HowlRound Theatre Commons
Date: 2014-08-14

After a quick lunch, John Glore (Associate Artistic Director, South Coast Rep), Charles Haugland (Artistic Programs and Dramaturgy, Huntington Theatre Company), Christian Parker (Associate Artistic Director, Atlantic Theater Company), Tanya Palmer (Director of New Play Development, Goodman Theatre), Martin Kettling (Literary Manager, Eugene O’Neill Theater Center), Ignacia Delgado (Coordinator, Sundance Theater Institute Program), Raphael Martin (Literary and Humanities Manager, Soho Repertory Theatre), Heather McDonald (Playwright), Liz Engelman (Freelance Dramaturg), and Nancy Barnett (Freelance) gathered around the table to discuss whether literary managers are gatekeepers (as suggested by Outrageous Fortune, the recent closed submission conversation at Arena, etc.) or “yes men.”

Most of the representatives at the table understood the idea of the “gatekeeper” but rejected the idea that there are people standing around blocking the gate.  Liz suggested that a home is more apt metaphor, with the literary office serving as a living room.  There is not room for everyone at every theater, choices have to be made, but literary offices are working tirelessly to open the door to find the artists whose work speaks to specific mission.  The “gatekeeper” metaphor is more apt when the work of the literary office is not directly aligned with the Artistic Director’s understanding of the programs and there is more of a potential for “the pile” to pile up.  When the literary office has a host of opportunities for playwrights (festivals, productions, workshops, etc.), there is less of a “gatekeeper” feeling.

Conversation shifted to focus on the subjective reality of script analysis.  There was a consensus that literary managers are fast to own up to the subjectivity when they love projects but are less likely to do so when they don’t connect to the piece.  Each of the literary offices represented made efforts to diversify their readers to prevent scripts from slipping through the cracks because the aesthetic and content of the piece don’t align with the taste of the literary manager.  How can we humanize our correspondence with playwrights?  People not buildings are rejecting scripts.

The discussion raised the question: Is there a problem? Writers are being discovered and plays are being produced.  The perception of a problem could come from the fact that submission is just one of several routes that plays find production.  The primacy of personal relationships was stressed yet again. The lack of diversity amongst writers and on our stages was cited as a major problem.  To bring the group into the breakouts, Heather McDonald suggested maybe that we’re doing things right now but could benefit by adapting to the shifting story in the 21st century?

Again the breakouts were incredibly varied.  Topics of conversation included authentic rejection letters (are rejection letters even necessary?), lack of diversity, the challenges of doing it right for everybody, and reading less plays more deeply.

- See more at: http://howlround.com/21st-century-literary-office-convening-day-2-nuts-bolts#sthash.hkLaLkkG.dpuf

Help us caption & translate this video!

http://amara.org/v/Sqfs/