Sunday, May 10, 2015 – Observations Along the Road

Sunday Stew: Women, Stains, Sex, Jazz, Food, Hotness and Bedrooms (A Mother’s Day Mix)

Posted onSunday, May 10, 2015Authorcahwyguy

Observation Stew Save your mom from the drudgery: here’s some tasty news chum stew to chew on while visiting mom:

Women and Orthodoxy. Many of us in the egalitarian branches of Orthodox have difficulty with the role of women. Yet that role is logical within the Orthodox viewpoint, and Orthodoxy is creative enough to come up with novel solutions to address concerns. Mayim Bialik writes about one: An Orthodox congregation’s clever approach to Women and the Rabbinate.
A Perfect Gift. Just in time for Fathers Day: A dress shirt that comes pre-stained. This is what I need.
Sex Archives. Last week, I wrote about an adult book store in London that accepted old porn. You were probably wondering about what those of us in the U.S. should do. This might help: The world’s largest adult book archive is at CSUN.
CSUN and Jazz. CSUN doesn’t just have a sex archive. They are also one of the best places for Jazz. This isn’t new. I have CSUN Jazz albums going back to the 1970s; they were award winning back then. One more article on music: the most important point in the history of pop music was the addition of hip-hop music.
Restaurant Notes. Two articles on restaurants. First, Solly’s in Sherman Oaks is closing on June 6. On the other side of the equation, here are Los Angeles’ longest surviving restaurants.
Appropos of Nothing. 12 Angry Men debate whether Amy Schumer is hot enough for television.
Small Stations. Here’s an article on LA’s smallest radio station and soon to be NPR affiliate: 97.5 KBUU, which broadcasts out of a Malibu bedroom.
I Can’t Remember. Everyone is touting Solid-State Drives as being better; they are one of the reasons that the iPod Classic was killed. Yet are they? We all know about wear problems on such drives if there are lots of reads and writes. Now comes words that SSDs can lose their data if not kept in temperature controlled environments.
No Conspiracy Here. Here’s a nice summary of why GM did not kill the streetcar.
Ringing In The Ears. Here’s a good article on the research being done to find a solution to tinnitus. I found this interesting, as tinnitus is a side-effect of migraines.
Pimpin’ for the Cuz’. Spreading the word about my cousin Erik’s kickstarter: he makes reeds for bagpipes. Yeah, it’s a niche business, but someone needs to make them.

The Better Half

Posted onSunday, May 10, 2015Sunday, May 10, 2015Authorcahwyguy

userpic=colony Whenever I enter a song into iTunes, it asks me for the composer. The software designer cared more about who wrote the music than who wrote the lyrics. Yet it is often the lyrics that stay with us; the lyrics that tell the story and convey the meaning. The issue isn’t just with iTunes. Often when we think of musical teams, we think about the music and the composition, and not the lyrics and the poetry. The musical we saw last night at The Colony Theatre (FB) — correction, musical play — highlighted that missing half. The production, “Words by Ira Gershwin“, focused on the lesser known half of the Gershwins: Ira Gershwin. It was a wonderful production that not only had great music, but taught me a lot about someone I had only viewed in juxtaposition to his brother. It is well worth seeing.

The structure of Words by Ira Gershwin is very simple. The author, Joseph Vass, uses the simple approach of having Ira Gershwin (Jake Broder (FB)) tell his story, with the songs being illustrated by a talented crooner (Elijah Rock (FB)) and chanteuse (Angela Teek (FB)). This structure (at least in my memory) reminded me a lot of the wonderful Ain’t Misbehavin’ — a simple structure that illustrated the songs and told the story, without trying to construct an artificial scaffold or being a random jukebox.

The order of presentation was sometimes chronological, and sometimes not. This was perhaps my only quibble with the show. At the end, when Ira related the death of his brother, I was left waiting for the rest of the story. It wasn’t made clear that many of the collaborations discussed in the show — such as those with Kurt Weill, Jerome Kern, and Harold Arlin, occured after George‘s death. The brief mention (in passing) of other contributors to the Great American Songbook — in particular, Irving Berlin, George Cohan, and Cole Porter — made me wonder whether there was any interaction between them. It is hard to believe their circles never crossed.

Still, the information presented about Gershwin was often new to me. I enjoyed the observations about lyrics and poetry, and the difficulty of fitting lyrics to established music. I found the observation about how music conveys mood and lyrics convey meaning, and the importance of the two together, to be quite astute. I had never really looked at Ira Gershwin in isolation from his brother, and this production prompted me to go out and pick up some of Gershwin’s collaborations with other composers.

This is one of those productions that I believe could have life beyond the mid-size Los Angeles stage. Given the similar structure to Ain’t Misbehavin’, the past success of musicals exploring other popular composer and lyricist catalogs, and the familiarity of Gershwin’s music… this one might be doable on a larger (read “Broadway”) stage.

The performances in this show were spectacular — both the actors and the musicians. Acting first :-). Broder’s portrayal of Gershwin created the character. He had the look of Ira Gershwin down perfectly. His singing voice was not perfection, but the imperfections made his portrayal of the lyricist even more realistic (you know this to be true if you’ve ever listened to performances of Cy Coleman, Sheldon Harnick, Fred Ebb, and even Irving Berlin. With the exception of Adolph Green, there’s a reason they weren’t on the stage.) You quickly accepted that this bespecticled accented man was a simple lyricist, content to write poetry, fit words to music, and be in the shadow of his more famous younger brother.

Supporting Broder’s Gershwin were Rock and Teek as the crooner and chanteuse, respectively. Neither were particular characters with backstories and such. They were there to sing. But they brought something extra through little interactions with Broder’s Gershwin, each other, and the members of the band that gave them appealing personalities. It was these little touches — which I’ll credit to the director, David Ellenstein, who originated the show at the North Coast Repertory Theatre in Solana Beach — that brought needed warmth to the production. Both Rock and Teek had wonderful voices; Rock’s was recently spotlighted in a concert performance at the Colony (and we saw Teek when she was in Ray Charles Live at the Pasadena Playhouse).

Another “performer” was the onstage band, consisting of Kevin Toney (FB) (Piano/Conductor), Terry Wollman (FB) (Electric and Acoustic Guitar); John B. Williams (Bass), and Greg Webster (Drums). They were spectacular music-wise, and the production provided each of them with a chance for a short solo spot. They also had interactions with the performers, and you clearly got the sense that there was fun on this stage — they liked each other, and they loved the music and the songs. This joyfulness came across to the audience and served to amplify the entire production. Well done.

Rounding out the performance and performance support side: Kevin Toney (FB) also served as music director; with the author, Joseph Vass, as musical arranger (and source for recorded piano performances). There was no specific credit for choreography, so presumably the movement was designed by the director, David Ellenstein. Whoever designed it, it worked well — in particular, Rock’s wonderful and unexpected tap number. Rebecca Eisenberg was the Production Stage Manager.

Turning to technical side: The scenic design by David Potts was very simple: a comfy chair, a light and table, a step-up area for the band, and a backdrop for projections. Simple, but it worked. The sound design by Drew Dalzell (FB) did what it was supposed to do: convey the sound well, although the directionality of the recorded piano had you turning your head to figure out why it was behind you. Similarly, the lighting by Jared A. Sayeg (FB) conveyed the mood well, although the color transitions of the scrollers were clearly noticeable and slightly distracting. The costume design by Dianne K. Graebner (FB) worked reasonably well, although my wife found some of Teek’s costumes to be overly clingy when they would have looked better looser. Properties and set dressing were by John McElveney (FB). Scenic art was by Orlando de la Paz. Amy Lieberman was the casting director. The Colony is under the artistic direction of Barbara Beckley.

“Words by Ira Gershwin” has been extended for one week; it now ends on May 24. You can purchase tickets through the Colony Website, or by calling the theatre at (818) 558-7000. Discount tickets through Goldstar are currently sold out; only full price tickets are available through LA Stage Tix. The show is well worth seeing.

I Love 99 Notes. The Colony Theatre is one of those success stories: A 99 seat theatre that was able to grow into a contract house that pays AEA rates to AEA actors. It took a strong subscriber base and support from the City of Burbank to do this. Before the show, I spoke to Barbara Beckley about the current battle. We both agreed that Los Angeles audiences, trained by discounters such as Goldstar, will not pay for intimate theatre at rates that would permit the wages AEA wants. We also discussed the importance of bringing in all stakeholders (including audiences) and how do we draw younger audiences to the theatre and turn them into subscribers. Los Angeles needs a solution that works for Los Angeles. Los Angeles needs a solution that actually builds an audience that will financially support AEA contracts, and a solution that builds shows that are able to move on from the intimate theatre incubators to contract shows. We need to work together to find the solution, not impose one from above that doesn’t fit.

Ob. Disclaimer: I am not a trained theatre critic; I am, however, a regular theatre audience. I’ve been attending live theatre in Los Angeles since 1972; I’ve been writing up my thoughts on theatre (and the shows I see) since 2004. I do not have theatre training (I’m a computer security specialist), but have learned a lot about theatre over my many years of attending theatre and talking to talented professionals. I pay for all my tickets unless otherwise noted. I believe in telling you about the shows I see to help you form your opinion; it is up to you to determine the weight you give my writeups.

Upcoming Shows: Later today, we’re off to see a movie: It’s Mother’s Day, and my wife wants to see the Jim Parson’s animated movie “Home”. Next weekend brings “Dinner with Friends” at REP East (FB), and may also bring “Violet: The Musical” at the Monroe Forum Theatre (FB) (I’m just waiting for them to show up on Goldstar). The weekend of May 23 brings Confirmation services at TAS, a visit to the Hollywood Bowl, and “Love Again“, a new musical by Doug Haverty and Adryan Russ, at the Lonny Chapman Group Rep (FB). The last weekend of May brings “Entropy” at Theatre of Note (FB) on Saturday, and “Waterfall“, the new Maltby/Shire musical at the Pasadena Playhouse (FB) on Sunday. June looks to be exhausting with the bounty that the Hollywood Fringe Festival (FB) brings (ticketing is now open). June starts with a matinee of the movie Grease at The Colony Theatre (FB), followed by Clybourne Park (HFF) at the Lounge Theatre (FB) on Saturday, and a trip out to see the Lancaster Jethawks on Sunday. The second weekend of June brings Max and Elsa. No Music. No Children. (HFF) at Theatre Asylum (FB) and Wombat Man (HFF) at Underground Theatre (FB) on Saturday, and Marry Me a Little (HFF) by Good People Theatre (FB) at the Lillian Theatre (FB) on Sunday. The craziness continues into the third weekend of June, with Nigerian Spam Scam Scam (HFF) at Theatre Asylum (FB) and Merely Players (HFF) at the Lounge Theatre (FB) on Saturday, and Uncle Impossible’s Funtime Variety & Ice Cream Social, (HFF) at the Complex Theatres (FB) on Sunday (and possibly “Matilda” at the Ahmanson Theatre (FB) in the afternoon, depending on Hottix availability, although July 4th weekend is more likely). The Fringe craziness ends with Medium Size Me, (HFF) at the Complex Theatres (FB) on Thursday 6/25 and Might As Well Live: Stories By Dorothy Parker (HFF) at the Complex Theatres (FB) on Saturday. June ends with our annual drum corps show in Riverside on Sunday. July begins with “Murder for Two” at the Geffen Playhouse (FB) on July 3rd, and possibly Matilda. July 11th brings “Jesus Christ Superstar” at REP East (FB). The following weekend is open, although it might bring “As You Like It” at Theatricum Botanicum (FB) (depending on their schedule and Goldstar). July 25th brings “Lombardi” at the Lonny Chapman Group Rep (FB), with the annual Operaworks show the next day. August may bring “Green Grow The Lilacs” at Theatricum Botanicum (FB), the summer Mus-ique show, and “The Fabulous Lipitones” at The Colony Theatre (FB). After that we’ll need a vacation! As always, I’m keeping my eyes open for interesting productions mentioned on sites such as Bitter-Lemons, and Musicals in LA, as well as productions I see on Goldstar, LA Stage Tix, Plays411.

Figuring the Factors

Posted onSunday, May 10, 2015Sunday, May 10, 2015Authorcahwyguy

userpic=theatre_tickets This morning, as I was getting ready to write up last night’s show at the Colony, my mind was swirling about mathematics and theatre. I was thinking about tiers and when shows could go to contract; about discussions I had had with Barbera Beckley before the show about audiences and what they could and would pay. I was thinking about the whole AEA kerfuffle, and I’ve realized that we may have it wrong — and a lot of this is because we keep trying to build things on dependent factors without data. Before I could tackle my writeup, I had to get this out of my head.

I’ve seen a number of proposals for tiering, and most are based on show budget. I think — to some degree — that’s wrong. You can’t determine whether you can pay the actors from budget alone. The budget of a three-actor show is very different than a show like Candide with a large ensemble. This got me thinking about what are the independent factors that might go into whether a show had the potential to earn sufficient funds to cover the rent and pay the actors. If you can look at shows and work out the factors from the existing data, you can come up — mathematically — with a good algorithm that might permit adequate tiering. I’ll note that by “pay the actors”, I mean all actors. If you treat any actor as an employee, you need to treat all of them as an employee. Pay rates might differ based on various factors, but some can’t be volunteer and some employees.

So let’s think a bit about common factors and whether they are independent. Here are some that come to my head:

Theatre Rental. Independent and Fixed. Your rental cost is based on time, location, and quality of the facility. Cheap facilities make it easier to pay actors; shows in expensive locations make it harder.
Number of Actors. The number of actors in a show has a direct bearing on operating costs. This should capture the total costs that vary based on actors — not only what you pay them, but their costumes, sound, makeup, wigs — things that vary based on more or less actors.
Musical or Play? This is the play vs. musical distinction. Musicals have increased operating costs due to musicians; they also tend to have a better draws as audiences tend to go to musicals.
New or Old? This is another significant factor in a show. New and unique shows may draw better for audiences looking for something new; on the other hand, they may be more difficult to promote because the show is not as well known.
Star Power. I don’t just mean actor-power here. Having a “well-known” somewhere in the credits — be it the director, an actor, the playwright — may draw the audiences in. For example, I can feel confident if I go to a local musical Nick directs that it will be well worth seeing.
Creative Cost. This is the fixed creative cost — the budget for the fixed aspects of the show such as set, lighting, and publicity. This would include both the costs of the creative team (people) as well as the cost of materials (set) and equipment rental (lights). This might be where budget based tiering could come into play.
Number of Seats. I was thinking about average ticket price as a factor — but it is dependent. Number of seats is a different factor. It is independent of the show, yet a key determinate of how much you make.

There are two additional factors that come into play: Length of Run and Ticket Price. I’m not yet sure about these and the impact on paying the actors. The length of run is clearly a factor under control of the producer. They help cover the fixed one-time costs, they help a little on fixed recurring costs (such as rental), and they have no effect on salaries (number of performances per week is a better factor on that). Ticket price should be set on cost in order that you can pay the actors appropriately. The problem is that sometime that needed ticket price is more than the audience can bear. This isn’t Broadway where you can name any price. The other factors must be such that the audience will be willing to pay it. We can’t quantify “willingness to pay”, but we can know that anticipated average per-patron income, taking into account comp, discount, promotional, and full price sales based on data, and we can determine that by company and community. We can then determine, based on that number and the factors above, the amount that actors can be paid.

It is important to note the factors that do not appear in the above. Membership companies? Makes no difference. Self-produced? Not a factor in and of itself. Both go to the creative costs, if anything. Budgets also don’t quite come into play fully because they are a product of the factors above. Note that I said “fully” into play. The budget can increase costs — fancier sets, more publicity — but doesn’t always translate into income.

As for what to pay the actors — that’s a can of worm I’m not going to tackle. I do believe that if you treat one actor as an employee you should treat them all — AEA or not — as employees. You can’t mix volunteers and employees in the same job; that’s the law. There’s also a distinction between exempt and non-exempt employees. The discussion to date has been simplistic, thinking actors are non-exempt employees. Non-exempt employees are typically hourly; there are requirements for breaks and lunch hours and overtime and such. Exempt employees — think white-collar professionals such as doctors, lawyers, and yes, computer scientists — have a fixed salary. They have different rules for overtime and breaks and such. I would tend to think actors would be non-exempt, meaning you could have a fixed salary for a fixed task. It is something that should be explored. I do believe there are factors that should go into actor pay once you are beyond the employee / volunteer distinction — that’s where union status, experience, “draw”, and other performance based factors can come into play.

As I’ve written before — I’m just an audience member (and a computer scientist and a mathematician). I can help identify what might be the factors that come into play, but I can’t plug in the numbers. What is clear, however, is that budget is not the sole simplistic factor. Being able to pay the actors at one budget level for a particular play doesn’t mean that for a different play, with different draw and number of actors, that budget will permit the same pay.

One of my favorite podcasts is Freakonomics. They emphasize that decisions must be made on hard data. The Los Angeles needs to determine the true independent factors for its productions — at any size theatre. What needs to be determined next is what values of those factors would permit appropriate levels of actor pay? This is what should go into the tiering discussion.

But… but…

The above is a pure mathematical approach. It is what we should pay the actors if we assume we are doing this based solely on profit and income and such. That’s the bean counter in me. But, as I’ve learned from this discussion, many LA actors don’t do this for the money. They do this for the challenge and the experience and the need to feed the soul. These are intangible forms of payment that offset dollars for many (not all; I’m sure there are mercenaries out there). The payment via intangibles is also independent of membership companies — but it does say that a given production has — as an additional factor — some intangible factor that comes into play that captures this. It would relate to the meatiness of the roles, the value of working with a particular creative or actor or company, the “payment to the soul”.

I don’t know how to address this; I don’t believe that I — a 30 year cybersecurity professional — could solve this nut. But I did want to share my musings on all the factors in the hope that someone might be able to piece them together algorithmically, and figure out a way to have that algorithm balance the “soul payment” vs. the “wallet payment” aspects as well.

Thoughts? What do you see as the key independent factors that we are forgetting to discuss?