home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- <text id=89TT0515>
- <title>
- Feb. 20, 1989: Trying To Get Its A.C.T. Together
- </title>
- <history>
- TIME--The Weekly Newsmagazine--1989
- Feb. 20, 1989 Betrayal:Marine Spy Scandal
- </history>
- <article>
- <source>Time Magazine</source>
- <hdr>
- THEATER, Page 102
- Trying to Get Its A.C.T. Together
- </hdr><body>
- <p>San Francisco's resident troupe copes with bumpy times
- </p>
- <p>By William A. Henry III
- </p>
- <p> Many organizations devoted to the arts -- and not a few
- corporations -- are badly shaken by the transition from a
- founding father to a new generation of more practical managers.
- The changeover is always bumpier if the founder's departure is
- forced. But rarely is the switch as onerous and nasty, or the
- repercussions so lingering, as in the boardroom battle that in
- 1986 ousted William Ball from San Francisco's American
- Conservatory Theater. Even today, Ball's successors seek to
- justify his removal by selling the theme of "renewal" to a
- still skeptical public.
- </p>
- <p> When Ball founded A.C.T. in 1965, one aim was to combine a
- training academy for actors with a professional performing
- troupe that would also serve as teachers. A second was to
- provide a major new entrant to the then burgeoning
- regional-theater movement. Those goals were met: the
- conservatory today trains 70 actors in an academically
- accredited, three-year program, and the company won a 1979 Tony
- Award for regional excellence. But an equal concern for Ball, it
- seemed, was to ensure his own longevity, and that effort not
- only eventually doomed his tenure but nearly destroyed what he
- had built as well. A.C.T. remains burdened with debt, compounded
- by the prospect of up to $10 million in needed maintenance for
- its aging theater. Worse, judging by its current offerings, the
- company is artistically humdrum.
- </p>
- <p> Underlying Ball's embattled tenure was one of the central
- conflicts in the history of the regional movement. Is a city's
- theater the actual building and the bureaucratic institution,
- and thus a public trust conventionally subject to
- accountability? Or is the theater instead the work onstage,
- which rises or falls according to the individuality and vision
- of the company's artistic leader? Ball, who regarded the ouster
- of an artist by a board of directors as a kind of theft,
- stipulated when A.C.T. came to San Francisco that the local
- board must serve only as fund raisers, with scant say over what
- plays he chose, what actors he cast, or how he ran things. By
- the late 1970s, predictably, board members demanded more power.
- Ball refused, and ultimately they quit.
- </p>
- <p> After the showdown, local and government support for A.C.T.
- dropped, and the company built up a $1.5 million deficit. In
- trying to close the gap, Ball increasingly favored small casts
- and minimal sets, leading to productions that seemed skimpy in
- the 1,396-seat Geary Theater, an ornately paneled and columned
- 1910 landmark where A.C.T. has played for more than two
- decades. Says Edward Hastings, a director since A.C.T.'s
- inception and Ball's successor as artistic director: "Bill's
- obsession with the deficit took over from artistic
- considerations, and that was not healthy for the company,
- although there were some wonderful productions right up to the
- end."
- </p>
- <p> By now the public seems ready to let bygones be bygones.
- Subscriptions are back up from a low of 11,700 to nearly 18,000,
- and ticket sales provide almost 75% of the $8.1 million annual
- budget. Unfortunately, what appears onstage is no guarantee of
- continued enthusiasm. August Wilson's Joe Turner's Come and
- Gone, winner of the 1988 New York Drama Critics Circle Award for
- best play, was daringly reconceived by director Claude Purdy
- rather than simply copied from the Broadway production. In
- almost every case, however, the changes dissipated the power of
- Wilson's poetic drama of rootlessness and religious obsession
- among blacks in a Pittsburgh boardinghouse in 1911.
- </p>
- <p> In the production, which will reopen April 7 at the Los
- Angeles Theater Center, Roscoe Lee Browne does an impressive
- star turn as the "conjure man" Bynum. But that is not the star
- role, and his vocal legerdemain only distracts from the
- inadequate James Craven as the play's emblem of unjust
- suffering, Herald Loomis. The visionary fit at the close of the
- first act and the self-mutilation at the finale, which
- terrified Broadway audiences, brought titters in San Francisco.
- </p>
- <p> Things are somewhat better in Hastings' staging of When We
- Are Married, J.B. Priestley's satire of the Yorkshire
- bourgeoisie circa 1908. The premise: three long-married couples
- discover that their wedlock may not be legal and suddenly are
- able to reconsider, with the wisdom of hindsight, the choices of
- youth. Two browbeaten wives and one henpecked husband toy with
- ditching their spouses, a notion that is faintly feminist for
- its time. Fittingly, the best performances come from Fredi
- Olster and Joy Carlin as the resentful wives and the delightful
- Ruth Kobart as a domineering dragon. Randall Duk Kim has wit
- and charm as Kobart's newly disobedient husband, but in a
- ghastly miscalculation, his Asian features have been caked with
- ruddy makeup so thick it resembles house paint. The show,
- superbly revived in London in 1986, is a souffle that never
- quite rises at A.C.T. If it has taken the new managers a while
- to live down Ball's legacy, it may take longer for them to live
- up to it.
- </p>
-
- </body></article>
- </text>
-
-