Tag Archives: strawshop

Strawshop’s This Land is a Timely but Slow Land

(Photo: Erik Stuhaug)

Look in the prop storage of any theatre and you are bound to run across a large collection of old suitcases—for all those stories of strangers’ arrivals or travels begun.

The amount of aging, battered luggage onstage at the Erickson Theatre in Capitol Hill in Strawberry Theatre Workshop’s production of This Land (through October 6; tickets: $15-$30) confounds the imagination. It also suggests a journey. While it’s easy to hop on board this slow freight of a show, the steady rhythm and tepid tempo may lull you to sleep.

Despite its pacing, the run of Strawshop’s Woody Guthrie pageant is prescient in its timeliness. Between these qualities we are left with an important show with interest that is social, political and artistic but in need of help as entertainment. Like the recent national political conventions this piece lives somewhere between theatre and a religious service. It is a pageant to Saint Woody, prophet of the workingman.

This Land is neither fully episodic nor dramatic in its structure. Rather the scenarios of song, anecdote, and essay drift past like blades of a mobile. The first act focuses largely on the Dustbowl story with some detours to the human problems of loneliness, disenfranchisement, and disconnection that persist in good times and bad. The second act deals with a broader range of social concerns including racism and workers’ rights. At nearly two hours the first act is a show unto itself. On the bright side it makes the second act feel somewhat quicker, though it too could have ended about four scenes earlier than it did.

The singing is heartfelt but all over the map in quality ranging from the barely audible to booming. The arrangements bring some pleasurable surprise to tunes that feel familiar at the first listening or from frequent recent airplay in the Mermaid Avenue tunes by Wilco and Billy Bragg. The heavy syncopation of the latter has been softened making them more of a piece with the rest of this soporific soundscape. A few sing-along bits provide interest without stirring any latent revolutionary impulses–such as demands for better entertainment or effective agitprop.

Guthrie’s songs are lyric-focused vectors for images and ideas. They work because the music gives the words a living heartbeat. This is problematic for the puppets, which behave similarly as vectors for the puppeteer’s emotions. Here the puppets are made to serve as emotional vectors for the action of the language. With their movements rooted in stillness we lose focus and our attention is divided evenly between, bottler-vocalist (or musician), puppeteer, and puppet.

Most of the puppets are bunraku style, defined by the hard-bitten, creased faces of Dorothea Lange’s photography. The puppets’ faces and hands have no articulation but the puppeteers squeeze a surprising range of emotion by movement and posture. They also have some nice bits of literal prestidigitation that facilitate dexterity. However, for all that there are some ill-chosen bits of action, like turning pages, that the puppets just can’t do and shouldn’t be asked to.

So why use puppets at all? It turns out that the psychologically distancing lack of articulation makes the puppets effective mouthpieces for Guthrie’s polemics. We can look the puppet in the eye when he speaks of greed and inhumanity where we might shut out a neighbor saying the same words. That semblance of contact makes the message direct but safe.

In that same vein the most successful bits are the most psychologically distanced pieces in which the puppets are at their most artificial. These included a hawker’s box of what appeared to be Jesus figures on springs, Italian style rod marionettes, and a cantastoria simultaneously played out through a pop-up book and projections (the projections are brilliant throughout). Perhaps the most striking puppetry was a set of tree shadowboxes revealed at key points in “Hang Knot” that tied lynching to the power dynamic between fruit growers and pickers.

This Land may be most successful in its shortcomings. It does not provoke but then it’s not a show for the Occupiers. It’s a show for former hippies in the afterglow of plush retirement. It leaves audiences emotionally stirred with propaganda without agitating them to action.

In his program notes director Greg Carter says that, with this show “…we won’t make a play about Woody Guthrie. He’ll make play about us.” In fact–and in keeping with Strawshop’s mission–the most interesting part of this production could be the conversations that can happen around it. Sadly those conversations are likely to begin with the confession that This Land is a bit of a bore.

Balagan Theatre Cast as an “Off-Broadway” Impresario

Balagan's Jake "Captain Hammer" Groshong responding to a tenant's request (Photo: M. Elizabeth Eller)

The Seattle Times reported the good news recently that Balagan Theatre finally has a place to lay its collective head again, after “outgrowing” its home in the basement of Boom Noodle, on Capitol Hill. Balagan has been tapped to manage the Erickson Theatre Off-Broadway, owned by Seattle Central Community College.

As a Seattle Central spokesperson explained to CHS:

The Broadway Management Group has had the contract to manage both theatres (BPH and Erickson). However, that contract expires in Sept. and by state rules we must issue an RFP and go through a competitive process to award a new contract. A committee of the college decided to award the BPH contract to the Broadway Management Group and the Erickson contract to Balagan.

As you know, nothing can happen in Seattle’s arts community without an outbreak of paranoid conspiracy theory, often based on people knowing next to nothing about the details. So no surprise there’s already a Save the Erickson page on Facebook. A Seattle Dances post says, based on no evidence provided in the post: “Seattle’s best, most professional, most affordable theatre for small dance companies might be going bye-bye.” [UPDATE: Apology here.]

It is highly unlikely that a single small theatre could hog the Erickson, of course. Small companies are usually struggling to put on the few short runs of shows they can afford to present. Besides dance companies, the Erickson’s tenants have included the highly regarded Strawberry Theatre Workshop and the New Century Theatre Company, without previous public complaint.

Meanwhile, on the Slog post about the move, Annex Theatre’s more due-diligent Chris Comte has questions about the lack of local visibility of the RFP, and Balagan’s qualifications:

…the RFP specifically seeks a PROFESSIONAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY to run the space, and not a VOLUNTEER-RUN PRODUCING ORGANIZATION to both operate the space and use it as a home base for their own productions, which would seem to present a glaringly obvious conflict-of-interest, since SCCC will not only be paying Balagan to run the Erickson, but will now, in effect, be subsidizing their productions to a significant degree.

Comte seems to be reading ahead, here, as I don’t think he’s seen the agreement specifics. It is also true that, generally, it’s easy to be envious of Balagan’s good fortune while being in no way prepared or interested in accepting the duties and headaches of a management company.

I contacted Jake Groshong, Balagan’s executive director, to see about Balagan’s planned usage. Groshong, who has an MFA in Arts Leadership from Seattle University, said he was aware there was anxiety about the change, but offered this reassurance:

Balagan will use it for our own productions only in 4 or 5 months out of the year. We want to see the place used as a true community venue that is accessible to the students, arts groups, and community at-large. This means not blocking off huge chunks of time when only one company can use it as much as possible. In fact, with the rentals we’re inheriting, we’re likely to get a max of 3 productions in the space for the first year. So overall, I think Balagan will use the space about 80 to 120 days/year.

Rather than complain about the change in management, I want to suggest that Groshong is right that the Erickson needs to become a “true community venue”–it’s central to Capitol Hill but tucked away between Pike and Pine on Harvard. It’s a great theatre for small companies, with 133 seats, but often they aren’t filled because small companies don’t have, singly, marketing budgets that can reach mainstream.

If “the Erickson” can become a known destination for Capitol Hill arts performance, then there are efficiencies in terms of cross-promotion and audience building. It might be possible to run some performances in repertory, to further build audience traffic. Certainly a shared home would give three small theatre companies reason to collaborate on back-end services that otherwise would be triplicated.

For a while, I’ve been asking companies to consider the benefits of separating distinct artistic goals and visions from everything it takes to produce them: support staff, lighting grids, box offices. Where there are physical realities that support this, it seems like a cooperative structure is the best way for arts groups to allocate resources. If this emerges bottom-up, out of Balagan Management, it would be a great thing for the arts in general.

UPDATE: Thanks to Chris Comte, who would like you to know his comments on Slog are on his own behalf, we have a link to the RFP (pdf), which I don’t believe either of the two existing tenant companies, Strawberry Theatre Workshop or New Century Theatre Company, were provided with any notice of. It appears Seattle Central Community College didn’t feel that was warranted. Once again, renters get screwed.

That said, the RFP itself asks only for a “qualified respondent to privately manage, market,
staff, maintain and make improvements to the Erickson Theater,” and most if not all of the requirements they list are something any theatre company would be familiar with.

Further, far from establishing a fiefdom, the RFP requires the management provider to:

…book events and promote services that will significantly expand both the numbers as well as the variety of plays, concerts, and other events held at the facilities, in keeping with the SCCC’s mission and values.

Also, I’m told that the management contract is open to rebidding each year. All that is required is for another company to express an interest in managing the Erickson. As I say, though, venue management is hard work. If you think Balagan has snagged a stealth residency, that’s one thing. If you think that Balagan has just snagged an enormous amount of extra work, as I tend to, that’s another.

In closing, wouldn’t it be wonderful if all three theatre companies (and any dance companies interested) worked on forming a Erickson-specific management company, one that was a distinct legal entity from the arts groups? (Perhaps something on the order of the non-profit partnership known as Beethoven, which consists of the Seattle Symphony, Seattle Opera, and ArtsFund.) If artists aren’t willing to experiment with socialism, who will?