skip to main |
skip to sidebar
August 2009
Interview by Followspot
**Photo credit: Sara Gray Photography**
from PCS to The Bullet Round
Followspot – How long ago and why did you get involved in Portland Center Stage? Megan Kate Ward - I interned for PCS in-between my junior and senior years in college. I was at Goldsmith College, University of London, in London, England, and I had come home and was interning with them, helped out with JAW [PCS's annual playwright's festival] a little bit and then the following year, my senior year, I got an email from Rose [Riordan] saying, “Hey, are you coming back to Portland?” And I said, “Yeah, in fact I’ll be home in two weeks.” She’s like, “Great. Come in and interview for a position.” I just graduated from college with a degree in theatre and I’m coming home to interview for a position at a regional theater. How lucky is that? And she invited me in and I interviewed for the Company Manager position. Dawn Sorgnard got the job and I did not, but Rose was like, “You’re pretty cool. Why don’t you intern again this year with me and you can help with JAW and stuff.” I did that as well, and after JAW some grant money became available to hire me part-time as the Artistic and Literary Assistant to assist both Mead [Hunter] and Rose with casting and scripts, organizing both databases and positions, etcetera, etcetera. So that’s how I started and then right before my third season I was hired full-time for a couple months before I was let go. I just started as an intern and then kept interning, and finally got hired.FS – When you got your degree in Theatre, what direction had you been hoping to go into?MW – I always wanted to direct, but this position came along and it was appealing because I got to work with Rose. I loved interning with her and was excited about interning for her again. She’s a female director and she is an Associate Artistic Director of a major theatre and I wanted to learn more about what that entailed and how she got there. I enjoyed working on JAW and learning about the casting side because I always thought I might enjoy that as well; and having that opportunity with her really showed me that I did. I love working with actors.And then, through staying there longer and also being Mead’s assistant, I fell in love with the literary side of things. He was a huge mentor in teaching me a lot about dramaturgy and scripts and what makes a good script; and it was just really lovely to work with him as well. I was very lucky in my position because I got both sides of the coin. I grew a deep respect for playwrights because playwriting is hard. You really can tell in the first 12 pages where [the playwright’s] going with the script and whether or not it’s something that is right for your theatre. And that was something I learned from Mead - I might like a script but you have to think about whether or not it’s correct for your theatre. You have to think about what your theatre’s mission is and how that script relates to it. I learned a lot from both of them and I [feel] very fortunate for my time there and, as sad as I was to leave, I also believe that it happened for a reason. It was time for me to work on me. I met a lot of actors in town from being the casting assistant, I met a lot of playwrights through being Mead’s [assistant] and through working on JAW, and it was just time for me work on the directing thing that I really wanted to do. And so it was good timing because I don’t think I would have been able to balance doing JAW and producing Bullet Round and working part-time for something else.FS – That segues into your current company, The David Mamet School for Boys. I found a blurb that says your mission is “To produce work that challenges conventional playwriting, take bold risks, and expose audience to new ideas.” Does that sound right for your mission?MW – I find writing missions really hard to articulate. I am interested in the different ways the stories are told. Because I had to read a lot of scripts for JAW, I became very familiar with many playwright’s voices and, ultimately, at the end of the day, a playwright that really has command of their voice is more interesting to read, and I think that’s something that Paula Vogel [has] really taught her students [how to do]. I don’t know what she teaches or what her classes are like, I just know that the scripts I read mess a little bit with form, but they are still true to their voice. I just hear a very distinct voice in all the different playwrights that come out of that program.FS – Can you give me some examples of playwrights you’re thinking of?MW – Well, for example, Jordan Harrison and Dan LeFranc both came out of that program. Jordan Harrison did Act a Lady, which [PCS] did, and Dan LeFranc did Bruise Easy for JAW a couple years ago. Completely different styles of writing, very interesting playwrights, but unique to their voice.FS – How do the two plays you produced recently with your company fit into this mold?MW – Dutchman and The Bullet Round come from two different eras, and Dutchman is more poetic because [LeRoi Jones] came from a poetry background but [the play is] also very charged because it was something that he was wrestling with, whereas Steven [Drukman]’s also has a message and is very funny, but the form is referencing La Ronde. It’s an homage to that form. It’s a cyclical play and its aim is to always keep us guessing and questioning what we think we know.FS –What excites you about that? I’m curious why this playing with form interests you versus maybe something older like Arthur Miller or Ibsen.MW - It’s so interesting because before I started working at PCS I didn’t fully grasp what new playwriting meant, I was like, “Why? There are already all these great plays.” But [new playwriting] is important to support because there are a lot of talented playwrights that are talking about relevant things. I mean there are all those plays that withstand history and still are relevant but there are also plays now that speak more to us and this era. Miller and Ibsen were new playwrights of their day doing completely different styles of playwriting.FS – How does something like Bullet Round speak to us today?MW – Well, Bullet Round for example deals a lot with karma and violence and gun violence and whether or not we are part of that or we create it. Whether we’re passive or whether we’re active participants in this violent world. But yet the play is funny and approachable. It has a message but it’s a good story. It’s interesting to watch and you’re vested in these characters and what they have to stay and the world they’re living in.FS – I also noticed for your first two plays with your theatre company you happened to choose plays dealt with the idea of racial identity. Is that a coincidence or is that something you’re interested in?MW – Yeah, it might just be a coincidence. I’m interested in it but I can’t say that all of David Mamet’s are going to be focused around the issue. Somebody else brought that up too and I see the connection but I don’t know that I made a conscious decision.FS – Why was it important to bring those two plays to Portland audiences?MW – I think they elevate consciousness on two levels. With Bullet Round, there is obviously the violence issue, also our assumptions – a lot of people were shocked at the graveyard scene when he was not his gay lover.FS – I totally thought that.MW – Everyone did. And that’s clever. Steven’s a bright playwright because he totally leads you there. And, also, with LeRoi Jones, I wanted to bring [The Dutchman] to life again now because, even though it’s a jewel of that era and we have all studied it within context, it also, still, sadly, has relevance, and [we produced it] before Obama got elected and it brings to light how far we’ve come since the 60’s …. And it’s now 2009.FS – What’s with the name of your theatre company?MW – Everybody asks. Well, what do you think? What comes to mind when you think of David Mamet?FS – Actually, my knowledge of David Mamet is pretty weak, so I tend to think of his style of short, choppy sentences, a lot of swearing, very aggressive and with sharp edges. As you can tell my conception is rather nebulous. So what do you think it means?MW – I actually think of ideas very similar to what you think. How the name came about is I was talking with my boyfriend [Kristan Seemel] about the plays that I like, and he goes, “That sounds like The David Mamet School for Boys.” And also because I am interested in swearing and getting in your face. I was like, “That is brilliant.” Because you automatically make the draw between a playwright who is known for his dialogue - he tends to focus on how people actually speak - and also, the [artistry] of their speech, like the swearing and all that stuff too. And then if you’re not a theatre person, there’s an in with him with his screenwriting and the movies. Most people think of State and Main and, possibly, Glengarry Glen Ross. I just thought, “What a person to have as an immediate association.” This is the theatre that’s going to do this type of work. Some of the people that asked about it have said, “You should make your website www.fuckyou.com.” [Note: This domain is already taken.] And then I have a sailor’s mouth.FS – What interpretations have you gotten from your name?MW – I did have somebody call in and say, “Is this the David ‘Mam-ay’ theatre company?” And I said, “This is The David Mamet School for Boys.” And then the follow up question was, “Well, who comes see these shows because I had a hard time finding information about it.” And was I like, “Well, the general public.” She said, “Is it just the parents of the boys in the school.” And some people have asked, “Who’s David Mamet?” Immediately, they google him.FS – So it’s kind of like an indirect educational tool. Have these people come after you’ve explained what your company is?MW – I don’t know. They’re on the list but I don’t know if they came to the show. It’s very interesting. I realized that [the name] was a little misleading. But they’ll catch on. I’m not worried about it.FS – Will you ever do a play by David Mamet?MW – For now, no.FS – What is your next project?MW – That’s my next question to myself. I’m working on Fool for Love [
CoHo Productions] and then the focus is back to David Mamet School for Boys, and you know, creating a website, maybe doing a fundraiser. I’d really like to bring out or workshop a play or do another show. I missed the grant deadline for RACC [Regional Arts and Culture Council] so I guess I’ll have to figure out another way. I could go several other ways but I have a lot of ideas for The David Mamet School for Boys. And sometimes I get ahead of myself so I’m trying to scale it back and ask myself, “But what’s next?”FS – What will The David Mamet School for Boys bring to Portland that’s currently missing?MW – I would like to bring back new work. I think there are a lot of really good playwrights in this town. There’s a lot of good support for readings, and I think Fertile Ground [Portland's 10-day new play festival] is doing a great job of continuing that and JAW does a great job, but I think there also needs to be someone that takes up [full productions] again. I don’t think it necessarily needs to be world premieres; I think that sometimes gets tricky. I mean it’s perfectly acceptable to do second runs and sometimes plays are dead in the water after they have their world premiere somewhere at a regional and then nobody wants to pick it up. Not always, but often people think, “Well, we didn’t get the world premiere credit,” so they lose interest. Technically, The Bullet Round was a world premiere but you better believe if a regional picks it up and wants to call it a world premiere, they’re going to get that privilege. And that’s fine with me, I understand. I’m just pleased we were able to bring Steven out and he was happy with the production. I want to focus more on playwrights.FS – Do you have a dream project you’d like to do for David Mamet?MW – Yes, but I’m going to tell you because I don’t anyone to take it. I’ve given away too many scripts and…. No.FS – Is there a way people can keep abreast of what’s going on?MW – Usually my blog, megankateward.blogspot.com.
Next up: Megan talks Fool for Love, Regional Theatre, and the Female Director
from Slamming Doors to The Artistic Eye
FS – For your next show, Fool for Love by Sam Shepard, how did you get involved in that?MW – Val Landrum and Chris Harder [see Oregonian article] approached me about putting my name as director when they submitted the proposal and they were very excited about working with me. I wasn’t very familiar with the script but as soon as I read it I was like, “This is fantastic” and they’ve cast themselves really well. We actually start rehearsals September 8th and I’m heading to a design meeting right after this - with Tim Stapleton, who’s lovely. He’s also playing the old man. I’m ready to kick his butt and he’s given me permission. My one direction to him now is, “Tim, can you be more invisible?” It’s a fun group. We’ve added Spencer Conway. And I’m just so excited to be in the room with them. They’re awesome people to collaborate with.FS - What about the play interests you?MW – The richness of the characters. The story – we’ve all been in that place where you’re in this heartbreakingly twisted love myth. It’s a very human experience and that was very attracting.FS – What do you think the play’s about?MW – It’s about abandonment, loneliness, and this trapped and cyclical behavior, insane passion, family. Lots of good things there, things that people are interested in.FS – Is there a definite spin you’re going to put on it?MW – I am taking the old man off the porch and putting him in the space.FS – Is he usually, literally, on a porch?MW – Yeah, literally outside the room. Outside the hotel room. I am also removing the walls. Sam Shepard writes in the stage directions very specifically about them banging into walls, slamming doors, and the sound that comes with that. And I’ve taken away all the walls and doors because I wanted to feel like there’s this little snow globe in this desert and they’re in this little box that’s totally exposed, and trapped. There’s a science experiment about the fleas. You put these fleas in a jar and they jump and they hit the top and they learn after awhile that’s as high as they can go, and you take off the jar and they don’t go any higher. There are no walls, [the characters] could leave the situation, they could remedy this, but they don’t. They create their own mess and walls. So we’re playing with different variations on that theme.FS – What’s with the old man being brought into the room?MW – I wanted him to be more connected to the characters. He is a part of it so I wanted to make sure he was a part of it and not that narrator on the side.FS – That sounds beautiful the idea of removing those walls. It sounds even scarier.MW – I have this picture in my mind and I think Tim has it too and I just know that whatever he does is going to be beautiful. And we have Don [Crossley] on lights so its going to be lovely. Annalise Albright is doing the sound and she did the sound for Mimesophobia [Sand and Glass Productions, 2008]. She will be making up the walls with sound. She’s got quite the task. “We took away the doors and the walls, and that’s now you.”FS – What interests you as a director and what makes a good director?MW – I find people fascinating and enjoy working with them. And the way that you can tell stories in the genre of theatre, as opposed to TV or movies, the fact that the audience is there as a community, our experience is together, live. And then you have to be willing to listen and be a good collaborator to be a good director. I don’t pretend to know all the answers but I have a good starting off point and then we can go from there.I bring to the table my vision and then I like to do a lot of table work, too, so we talk that all through so everyone’s on the same page about the timeline and the way the script works and the way a character works within it, kind of taking a dramaturgical background first. Everyone has a voice at the table and I’m really like the eyes and ears from an audience standpoint, but I also need to know from an actor, “Does that work for you? Or does that not work for you?” Because to me it looks great, but if that’s not coming from a genuine place from within you, then we have a problem. It’s this collaboration; it’s everybody works together. It’s not like I’m the big boss and I can say yes or no, whatever. I can, but it’s more interesting to have many voices as opposed to one. Somehow that creates a more unified story when everyone’s working communally on the way they come at it. Somehow, it doesn’t look collage-ish or mishmashy; it all comes together because we’re all on the same page but bringing our own expertise to it.FS – Why do you do this?MW – Why I do theatre? ‘Cause I’m crazy. I don’t know why I do theatre. I’ve just never not done theatre. And I can’t stop.FS – Do you as an artist have something to offer that maybe no one else does?MW – I’m still figuring that out. And I’d like to figure that out here [in Portland].FS – Are you interested in doing non script-based theatre?MW – Yes. I shied away from it in college in England, devised – we call it devised. There were two classes of devised in my year and one of staging dramatic text, and I took the staging dramatic text. I think [devised’s] really hard and so I shied away from it. You as an audience member can tell when they’re bullshitting earlier. It’s difficult, but I would totally love to work on a project like that, I’m just not sure what yet.FS - Why would you want to do it?MW – To challenge myself because I think that’s another important way of telling a story. And I see good and bad parts of that but I don’t know how to solve it, you know, it’d be interesting to try it as well for myself.FS – Would you want to work for a company like Portland Center Stage again?MW – Meaning a regional theatre?FS – Yeah.MW – I don’t know how I feel about the regional theatre at the moment. I don’t know that it’s necessarily serving a specific community anymore. And I’m not talking specifically about PCS. [Regionals] often do the New York hits or the latest Pulitzer Prize winner and I’m not sure that the subscribers are that interested. Or maybe they are. But I think ultimately the buffet style of theatre can present a muddled mission. I think you can do a play that is interesting to the community, like Storm Large for example. [Crazy Enough was] interesting to the community, sold out like crazy. I’m just not sure about the regional theatre model. I feel it might change a bit. I also wonder about a subscriber model too and the benefits and non-benefits of having subscribers. You can’t please everyone and I’m not sure you should try. So maybe you should just say, “Hey I’m doing this type of theatre and if you are interested join us.” Which I guess would make it more like a membership based theatre like Oregon Shakespeare Festival, which may or may not give you more freedom in deciding your season.Right now in David Mamet’s history I’m trying to figure out whether to go 501(c)(3) or LLC. LLC is a for-profit and you don’t have to have a board, but you’re also ineligible for a lot of grants. It’s interesting to me because I never thought of an LLC but somebody suggested [I] should check that out as well. I don’t know. I think that regional theatres need to explore their city and do stuff that’s important to [their city]. And maybe leave the touring companies to bring in the Broadway hit.FS – To make it more personal.MW – Make it an event for the audience. And whether or not it is the latest Pulitzer Prize winner or the newest play by a local writer, [the plays] should have similar weight. I just think the [play] that’s going to matter more to the community is going to be the playwright that they know or the issue that interests them.FS – Do you think regional theatre’s in danger of estranging its audiences because of its trend right now of grabbing the latest Broadway hit?MW – I don’t know about actual numbers but I feel that regional theatres that have a strong mission statement tend to do better than ones that have a hodge-podge season. I’m more interested in Steppenwolf or Woolly Mammoth. Ones that have a specific focus on ensemble or new work. They tend to bring something unique as opposed to the collective smorgasbord that’s meant to go out to the masses - I’m not sure who that’s serving, because it’s not specific enough. It has a place but when push comes to shove are you going to be more interested in the buffet or the specific place in a restaurant? I look across the board and more and more theatres are doing the same work. It was published in American Theatre Magazine that the year Doubt came out, Doubt and A Christmas Carol were the most produced play amongst the regional theatres. I wonder what else could have happened. Not that Doubt isn’t a good play. It is. But what else could we have produced? Or did the stars align and everyone had to do this play? I personally think it would have had more of an impact if it had been produced during the height of the Iraqi conflict, because that’s what John Patrick Shanley was writing about.FS – From what you’re saying, we should give our audiences more credit, that within the masses there actually is some intelligence and … more interest in theatre, and it also sounds like you think that theatre does serve a purpose.MW – Absolutely. There are those people who’re like, “Theatre’s dead!” I’m just like, “Excuse you.” This is the art form of storytelling that’s been around a lot longer than most performance based art forms. Yeah, there is a way to tell specific stories through movies or T.V. but I think that theatre has the biggest impact on a smaller scale. I mean, it’s not going to ever reach as many people but there’s something about bringing a bunch of people in and you’re all sitting in the same theatre together and having this common experience, which is different than all coming into a movie theater and watching it. It’s more disconnected that way, whereas in theatre you’re all laughing together.FS – You’re interacting with the energy on the stage.MW – You can feel it. You can watch the actors be affected by that.FS – To get specific to Portland, who excites you and what theatre company excites you?MW – I just think that the volume of work that Portland puts out for the size is exciting. There’s a lot of good work and I don’t want to leave anyone out.FS – Is there a possibility of too much theatre? Because there’s always the question of but what about the quality of all that theatre?MW – I think that works itself out. As much as we hold New York up on a pedestal that doesn’t necessarily mean that the work is much better there, it just means that there’s more of it, and we have a lot of work here but, per capita, is our percentage higher than New York? Probably. I don’t know.FS – Should New York be held on that pedestal?MW – It’s hard because New York is a cool city and it does offer a lot more funding than Portland. A lot of companies, a lot of people will donate and go to the theatre. I remember reading somewhere in a waiting room – Vanity Fair or something – and they were criticizing the Prince’s new girlfriend – Prince William - (I had a lot of time) - and one of the critiques they had was about how ill-suited she is for the Prince because she doesn’t attend the theatre and therefore lacked culture. Here’s the city of London that thinks you are not classy if you don’t go to the theatre. So New York may have some of that as well. And I love that idea - I want that to be universal – that you’re not classy, you’re not cool if you don’t attend the theatre.Portland is great because a lot of people value [theatre], however, there’s not a lot of corporations in Portland, let alone ones that give to the arts. So it’s difficult to find support in the same way that New York does. Oftentimes the playwrights move there because there’s more work for them, but if we could get all the playwrights in the world to move to Portland, we would be as cool as New York. There’s a lot more support for it over there. That’s why there is so much more.I understand why a lot of actors, etcetera, move out of Portland but, at the same time, if we could support them and pay Equity wages then we would keep them, because of course they all want to live here. I mean, it’s plain awesome. Heelloooo. Even though they go to the big cities Chicago, New York they all want to come back to Portland, but we’re not making it financially viable for them.FS – Is there anything you’d like more of, something we could improve?MW – I’d really like to work on making everything more collaborative. We have the luxury of being such a tight-knit theatre community. I feel like a lot of people know each other, work together, and go see all the same shows. I never feel alone when I go to the theatre because I undoubtedly run into somebody I know and that’s lovely being part of that community, but if we could somehow work together more on space and props and costumes and actors. There are all these writer groups and I’ve often thought there should be an actor group. That’s the other thing about our actors. We have some really good actors in this town but we work differently than a lot of cities [because] we don’t audition our actors as much. They often get cast because I know your work because I’ve seen you in three shows. And if that actor were to move to L.A. or New York for awhile they’d become a better auditioner because they have to do it so many more times a day, weeks, months, whatever. If there’s a way to give more support to the actors in auditioning workshops…or you wanna work on the scene, sort of in that way playwrights groups are founded, where I have a scene that I need to read, will you help me read it? Open source in a way, continuing education, exchanging ideas.Auditioning is hard. It’s scary. You may be the most prepared person in the world and you get into the room and phht!, all gone. So I like, in my auditions, to make them more lax, more like we’re playing. Often, in the PATA [Portland Area Theatre Alliance] auditions or at PCS auditions where there’s a time limit, you have three minutes, four minutes, and that’s really nerve wracking. I know there are pluses and minuses in the audition process. I think being more familiar with the auditioning process will give them more confidence when they go into the room and will be able to handle the three minutes better. And if they audition regionally, it will help.FS – Would you like that on a director level?MW – It’s harder on the director level. I don’t know. People’s processes are different and it’s hard to as a director sit there and say “That’s wrong, because I do it this way.” You do what works for you. Sometimes I do talk to different directors if I’m having a problem. It might work. It might be good.FS – Who are your influences? We talked about Mead, we talked about Rose.MW – When I was [in London], Katie Mitchell was the new crazy-cool director to watch, although I don’t think my style is anything like hers, I think she is important to focus on, and she’s actually written a book, and I went out and bought it because I really like the work that she does. Also Nancy Keystone. Again, her work is probably nothing like my work but she has such an artistic eye in all things, and it’s really wonderful how that encompasses everything she works on.FS – Do you feel very conscious of yourself as a female director? I hate that qualifiier because you are both female and a director.MW - I’m a woman and I’m a director and I don’t know how to be anything else. But I also realize the complications of being a woman and a director. But I’ve never felt like I’ve not been taken seriously because I am a woman. If anything, I’ve put added pressure on myself to achieve my goals sooner so that I can also have a family. I realize the biology of a woman sometimes alters one’s career goals, both positively and negatively, but I just want to make sure I’ve achieved my personal career goals before having children. Because not having children is not an option for me. I’ve always seen myself as both a career woman and a mother. I’m very stubborn about that. I want to have my cake and eat it too, now I just have to figure out how.FS – What else would you like to share with the world about your world, about your art, about your dog Joey?MW – Joey is the best dog in the world. He’s adorable. Just that.FS – Closing random question: Do you prefer crunchy or smooth peanut butter?MW – Both.FS – Ooohh. No definite answer to that one.MW – I do like them both. I buy smooth organic PB for Joey – he gets his own peanut butter.Keep track of Megan Kate Ward at megankateward.blogspot.com