Ann Filmer
Artistic Director, 16th Street Theater (founded 2007)
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
I was thinking of who excites me most right now. I have to say Mary-Arrchie Theatre run by Rich Cotovsky. I have been going there for 15 years and they are doing some of their best work right now. Nothing like ascending those stairs at nighttime and knowing something thrilling and dangerous will be happening once the lights go down on the audience and come up on Angel Island. It epitomizes Chicago theater to me: real, magical, gritty. They are theater artists who live IN the world and speak the language of Chicago.
Martha Lavey (phone interview)
Artistic Director, Steppenwolf Theatre Company (founded 1976)
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
From my observation, Chicago theater is in a very good moment right now, with national attention as the site for new plays, new artists. Chicago artists are very proud to be from here.
It’s a good place to get started. The School at Steppenwolf, now in its twelfth year, has graduated a number of ensembles that have started when they met at the school.
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed? What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
That Chicago style, coming out of Steppenwolf in the seventies and eighties—visceral, psychologically urgent acting, intensity—still exists.
The ensemble aesthetic tends to be one of acting among the actors, as opposed to being turned out. I see this in so many other places, in New York, the actors are conscious of the audience as opposed to be acting with each other.
There is another stream, represented by the likes of Lookingglass, that is more presentational. Based on myth, literature. We see it especially in the work of Frank Galati here and Mary Zimmerman.
Overall, the Chicago style has grown very sophisticated but I don’t doubt that it remains anchored in the visceral, loud.
Here at Steppenwolf, David Mamet’s “American Buffalo” has the same urgent style of acting, but we also do things like Frank Galati’s “Kafka on the Shore,” that is visual, and broader. Or like Tina Landau’s “The Tempest” which is very visual but she also wanted to do Shakespeare with an ensemble.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
I see new work that I love all the time… but I’m hesitant to endorse any particular company.
Tanya Saracho
Founding Artistic Director, Teatro Luna (founded 2000)
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
When we founded Luna it was a sad landscape for Latina actresses on Chicago stages. The shows and roles were few and far between and a lot of them where completely stereotyped: I know there are some veterans with wars tories. But now, more and more doors are opening on the smaller and bigger stages. I think things are looking up. Maybe not at the rate I’d like to see—I mean, a quarter of the population of this city is Latino, you’d think that would be reflected in taking up a quarter of the theaters—but there are lots of hopeful signs and that’s what I’m holding on to. Our journey to inclusion has been an interesting thing to witness, these past nine years and I think we’re hitting a good pace.
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed? What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
Yes. And I recognize our Chicago style everytime I go to see something in New York. A more articulate person could put it better but this Chicago style is kind of raw, and simple and delicate yet fully meat and potatoes; hearty. It’s a joy to behold. I just saw Hank… oh, his last name slips me…well, I just saw Hank in UTC/People’s “Cuba and His Teddy Bear” in an unconverted storefront in Humboldt Park and I said to Derrick Sanders who was watching the show with me, “THIS is Chicago Theater! This is what they mean when they say CHICAGO THEATER!” The acting was burn your fingers hot. I mean, sick sick sick stuff. Off the scale. And it’s not just the acting, it’s the way we make theater too: All or nothing. We love this stuff and it shows. The way we’re willing to participate and have a conversation about this artform; not only to criticize, or to throw around knowledge in an elitist way, but to really get to the root of something, THAT is what I love about this city. To me these watchdogs of Chicago theater are the Tony Adamses, and the Nick Keenans. They’re like our phillosophical watchdogs. Then you have your critics who want to see you win, who love the theater so much they will follow you and nurture you: Kerry Reid, Catey Sullivan, Nina Metz, Carrie Kaufman, Fabrizio Almeida. Even when what they say hurts, it’s like, they’re saying it because they want you to succeed. And then you have those TALENTS, right? Those emerging and established quintesential talents which only Chicago could’ve engendered: Sean Graney, David Cromer, Tracy Letts… Eason, Koon, Allen, Huff, Wegrzyn, McCullough, Jacqmin. I could go on, but each and everyone of those make up the sum of our parts to create this… I don’tknow… this beautiful thing. God, I love this city.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
I think I answered that above. I do love the ladies right now: Nambi Kelley, Joanie Schultz, Marisa Wegrzyn, Rohina Malik, Laura Jacqmin is hot!, Ann Filmer’s doing something great in Berwyn, Mia McCullough, ok, those are mostly playwrights right? You can tell I’m biased. Anna Shapiro… there I go again with the ladies. I don’t know. I just love these girls, man.
Mickle Maher
Co-founder, Theater Oobleck (founded 1988)
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
Glad to have been here. Glad to have survived Bush and the worst economy since the depression. Hurray for us.
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed? What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
There has always been a Chicago style of pizza and it has not changed. Chicago has no style in anything else. Our theater makers, however, are distinguished by their willingness to work for pizza of any style.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
I avoid exciting theater. It makes me jealous.
Brian Golden
Artistic Director, Theatre Seven (founded 2006)
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
I’ve only been here for the second half of the decade. I don’t that I yet feel qualified to speak to “movements” or make global observations about the scene. I feel that Chicago artists, because of the healthy non-Equity scene, don’t experience in the same degree some of the problems that plague artists in other major cities. You don’t have to have a million dollars to get your work produced; you certainly don’t have to have expensive headshots or a killer resume to work in significant company. While I have my frustrations with the theater press here, I feel that by and large we as artists have advocates in the local press – people that are willing to get out and see what’s being done, and talk about it fairly, for the most part. The fact that my company, approaching our fourth season, can produce something that will be featured in the Chicago Tribune, recommended for Jeff Awards, or in general attain some high visibility is a real blessing and something lost, I think, on those to whom New York is the center of the theatrical universe.
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed? What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
I think it’s the can-do spirit and a versatility of the artists involved. I think this is a place where with multiple talents fit in, because the productions and companies here are so ground-up, you’ve got to do a lot of things and have a diverse set of skills to fit in and pull it all together. Theatre Seven has only 10 members, but we’ve got 6 actors, 4 playwrights, 4 directors, 2 designers, 1 stage manager and 10 capable box office agents. I don’t think we’re the exception – people here can do and do do a lot of things.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
I’m excited about the recession, in a way. I think it has the opportunity to force companies to really focus on in what makes them special – telling their story, doing their work, keeping what elements of that are essential and jettisoning the rest. I think it ought to push companies to become more efficient and more creative – those are both good things.
I’m excited by the collaborative spirit that has emerged from this recent time – companies looking to share ideas, resources and artists in a way that I don’t remember them doing before AIG lost its ass.
I’m excited about companies that tell stories that matter to folks in their neighborhood in the city of Chicago, today. I’d put Serendipity Theatre Collective and New Leaf Theatre in that group. I like their work very much.
I’m excited to see American Buffalo at Steppenwolf!
PJ Powers
PJ Powers
Artistic Director, TimeLine Theatre Company (founded 1997)
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
The exciting thing about Chicago theater is that it’s continually evolving. Every week it seems there is a new artist in town, a new company forming and a new play opening. So there is always the possibility of anything happening. That is the thing that has always been so appealing about working in Chicago – there are possibilities! A company like TimeLine can be started by six people throwing $50 into the hat to get started and 12 years later it’s a thriving organization with more than 40 shows to its credit. And our story is far from unique. All that being said, however, one thing that does concern me is the state of the mid-sized theater. There is an ever-widening gap between large and small theaters, and very few small theaters are growing into mid-sized theaters (and by mid-sized I mean in the $1 million – $4 million budget range). The majority of mid-sized theaters in Chicago have been mid-sized theaters for many years (i.e. Court, Northlight, Victory Gardens) and perhaps companies like Lookingglass and Writers are the only ones who moved into that tier in the last decade (I may be missing someone?). But it is my hope that there are more organizations that can strengthen the mid-sized tier of theaters to further stabilize our dynamic theater community and offer more stable employment opportunities for artists and administrators.
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed? What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
I’m actually quite pleased to say that there isn’t necessarily a “Chicago style.” No longer is this a town that is characterized as just the “in-your-face” acting style, or the home of Mamet, or the improv mecca. It can be all of those things. And much more. The greatness is that we have a broad array of theatrical styles and organizations, and an audience can sample both traditional and non-traditional programming and be a part of the discovery process of the next great thing that might help define (or expand) the “Chicago style” of theater.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
One thing that has always excited me — and I continue to see it from not only people who’ve worked here for decades but also from those who are fairly new — is that there is a very open dialogue between companies. The collegial spirit of Chicago’s theater community is extraordinary. And rare. And it is that openness and supportive (yet healthily competitive) nature of our interaction that ultimately makes this a genuine “community.”
Zeljko Djukic
Artistic Director, TUTA Theatre Chicago (founded 2001)
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
Very exciting beginning of the decade, with theater community forming through small theater groups, their uncompromising and risky work supported by both Chicago audience, larger theaters, and relevant critics; and very disappointing end of the decade with even bigger presence of the commercial broadway wanna be productions again supported by both audience, larger theaters, and relevant critics. There is a considerable drop in the foundation support for chicago based theater lately (Kaplan is leaving, etc.) which will negatively impact the theater community.
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed? What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
I don’t think there was a Chicago style in early 2000, but there is “Chicago theater ethics”, a sense of importance and need for theater in the city which is great and hopefully it continues.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
The fact that Chicago theater is getting exposure elsewhere; every new play by Tony Kusher; occasional risks taken by Trap Door Theatre, Red Orchid, The Hypocrites, or The Steppenwolf Company. Amazing acting/musical talent in performers.
Dennis Zacek
Artistic Director, Victory Gardens Theater (founded 1974)
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
Chicago has become one of the leading theater communities in the world.
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed? What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
Chicago theater has an emphasis on an exploratory rehearsal mode in which ensemble acting prospers.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
The House Theater
Don Hall
Founding Director, WNEP Theater
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
As Broadway In Chicago has grown into the giant multiplex of the Loop, Off Loop companies have either emulated BiC’s artistic track (playing for the tourist crowd and generating more in terms of escapist entertainment) or Steppenwolf’s (a continued focus on new work and fostering the littler companies for mutual gains.) Those on the Fringe have become more fringey, pushing boundaries aesthetically and experimenting for those crowds less enticed by the Big Ticket shows. Alternative performance spaces, strange re-interpretations of classics and a ton of original material has abounded.
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed?
From my end of things, Chicago-style is comprised of telling original stories with a bit of snark underneath. Even the most bizarre experimental stuff has a sense of humor about itself and benefits from being the sketch comedy, stand up and improv capital of the world.
What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
The Midwestern voice is less refined and intellectual without sounding so. Smart theater with that Mark Twain spark.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
Theater Oobleck is consistently pushing the envelope, Graney and the Hypocrites are generating defining work, Steep Theater and the side project are just now hitting their stride and look to be major players in the next decade. Wildclaw Theater is creating a niche that is exciting and captures the geeky fun of theater and Kimberly Senior is becoming the Mary Zimmerman of her generation. In spite of shitty economic times, the little guys are flourishing and that does not surprise me one bit.
Michael Halberstam, Artistic Director
Kathryn Lipuma, Executive Director
Writers’ Theatre (founded 1992)
Any observations or thoughts about Chicago theater in the last decade?
Theater in Chicago has extended far beyond the metaphorical walls of our city. The significant number of productions moving to or being restaged in New York and/or London (PACIFIC OVERTURES, AUGUST: OSAGE COUNTY, ADDING MACHINE, CRIME AND PUNISHMENT, A STEADY RAIN, OUR TOWN, SUPERIOR DONUTS) have helped draw great attention to the fact that Chicago is an amazingly prolific and adventurous dramatic center. Furthermore, the success of individual artists who have made their home here (David Cromer, Gary Griffin, Tracy Letts, Michael Shannon, Josh Schmidt, Keith Huff) and who are now enjoying national acclaim has further deepened the respect with which our community is held elsewhere. We continue to lag behind major city centers in terms of artistic compensation, certainly for designers and certainly given that our artists have diminished opportunities to make commercial money in film and television as compared to London and New York. We continue to battle between the need to diversify our creative pool by importing talent for specific projects and ensuring that we nurture and support those who have chosen to build their careers here and dedicate their lives to our community. However, we have unquestionably proved our worth as a major force on the world’s stages and despite the failed Olympics bid, the theater can still prove to be a major and long term tourist draw. Should we manage to market ourselves as a destination theater city to the same degree that London and New York have done, we might prove an even greater asset to the economic health of our city than we are currently (which by the way is considerable).
Is there a “Chicago style” anymore (if there ever was) and has it changed? What, today, distinguishes Chicago theater from anywhere else?
It is my belief that the “Chicago Style” was born from within of a community of actors many of whom had amazing courage and facilities for discovering truth but not a great deal of classical technique. In the past twenty years or so, an influx of classically trained actors and the rise of theaters like Chicago Shakespeare, Court and Writers’ Theater, a new blend of guts and technique has emerged. Chicago has therefore come to be known as a city where truth, complexity and sophistication now regularly reveals itself on our stages. We can pull of the sparkling wit and elegance of OH COWARD and also the veracity and fervor of AMERICAN BUFFALO. It is no wonder then that our work is emerging with such power upon the world stage. We embody the wit, sophistication and intelligence of the London Stage with the heart and passion of the New York theater scene and frequently outdo them both (as beautifully articulated in Charlie Newell’s excellent staging of ROCK ‘N ROLL which was vastly superior to either the West End premiere or the Broadway remount of that production. We have refined our guts and glory real-blood-onstage beginnings to a simplicity and elegance that can be quintessentially found in the work of David Cromer.
Outside of your own company, who or what excites you most about local theater right now?
Chicago at its finest nurtures artists for the totality of their work as oppose to a single success. Neither does the city condemn an artist when he or she fails but rather Chicago usually applauds the effort and eagerly awaits the next adventure. As a city, our artistic leadership always respects the honest and simple approach. We foster and develop the next generation giving breakthrough chances to young upcoming actors, directors and designers. We generally don’t applaud the artist who sacrifices textual clarity and fidelity for self aggrandizement. As a consequence of prizing these values we support new work perhaps more than anywhere else in the country. Also, thus far at least, star power is not necessary for selling tickets and local artists are prized by our institutions and audiences.
