Northwestern Student Theatre

I think something that might reduce the "us and them" vibe of Waa-2 could be to push back the audition times. Since they don't do much in fall quarter (feel free to correct me if I'm wrong in that!) that couldn't be done by other members of the Waa Mu community, would it be possible to audition them in like, mid-November so they're still chosen well in advance of the writing class, when they're most helpful? That way, they wouldn't be segmented off from the rest of the freshman class before most friendships / the freshman community as a whole has had a chance to settle in.

In the forum about petitions, someone mentioned the way director announcements are handled on Facebook. It's not just that different theatre boards publish their directors. Every board member makes a status, every producer exclaims about how excited they are to work with their director, and every director expresses their gratitude. I understand that everyone is thrilled and wishes to convey their excitement to the community, but it can be overwhelmingly difficult for people who didn't get a slot.

I'm very concerned with the theatre community on this campus and how we can create a culture of inclusivity within our community. However, I think the way that people behave on Facebook, through their desire to share their accomplishments and excitement, can often create a culture of exclusivity, where people on the outside are left to wonder why they weren't good enough and why they are so upset when everyone else is so excited.

And now for the reason behind the anonymous account. I feel ashamed by how upset the following situation made me, and for that reason wish to remain anonymous. I also don't want the people mentioned (not by name) to feel personally attacked, because I use this example to illustrate what I feel is a larger problem.

A couple months ago, some theatre majors held a party and invited a bunch of people within the NU theatre world. At this event, professional quality photos were taken and posted on Facebook, shared widely by people who had attended the party. Some even referred to this party as "theatre prom." I am close friends with many people who were invited to this party (in fact, it felt like all my friends were invited) and have worked on shows with the hosts. I wasn't invited. When I saw all the photos and statuses on Facebook, it felt like a door was slamming in my face. This is the world of people who matter, and you're not allowed in. Of course, I'm not saying that two people can't hold a private party and invite the people they want to invite. Nor am I saying they can't take photos. But photos used to be for preserving memories, and Facebook has changed that. When those photos are shared publicly, I would hope that the sharers think about the people who will see them and how those people will feel. Or am I just being oversensitive?

I think that across society, people use Facebook to emphasize their triumphs, and thus project confidence and success. No one wants to "share" feelings of inadequacy. And so Facebook can make us feel like everyone's grass is greener. But in theatre, a field that is by nature exclusive and competitive, I think we could stand to be a little more careful. Of course, we can feel proud of our achievements and happy that we got to spend time with our friends. But in this collegiate setting, couldn't we remain mindful of those who are still trying to get their foot in the door?

Thoughts?

To be perfectly honest, I think the harshness of petition season comes from the fact that there is nothing transparent about it at all. Decisions are made about you being adequate to direct or produce a show based on five to ten minutes of totally subjective questions. It's impossible not to feel judged personally based on the results of these petitions. Board members do a very good job of being excited and supportive towards every person who petitions but this just makes matters worse. There is no way to make these decisions based on the information gained through petitions. I believe this is what contributes to the culture of friends choosing friends and boards choosing people they have worked with before. Because it's so hard to learn enough about a person solely from a petition, directors/producers/board members seem to get chosen based on prior knowledge and work. Obviously it's tough because sometimes these people are the best for the job, but it's very difficult to feel like you have any control or contribution in StuCo from the outside looking in. The share of power in StuCo is not equitable, not in the slightest. It's a cycle of the same people getting chosen again and again. Just look at the directors list. A majority of the people are either on boards, or have directed in the past few seasons.

Sam, I agree with you that waking up to petition results Monday morning sucks. Your suggestion makes a ton of sense, but I think more needs to be done.

Suggestions:

- Stop blasting facebook with statuses and tags announcing the decision. It sucks to be reminded that you didn't get the position for the rest of the day after results are posted.

- Board members should not be allowed to direct or produce for their own board. A board cannot make an objective decision on another board member and it hurts even more to be rejected by your fellow board members. Besides, the point of a board seems to be to support the community in creating theatre. Choosing a member of your own board to direct/produce for you does not help the community, instead it cuts you off from the community.

- Change the timeline of petitions? Board members stay up way too late working on these petitions. It's not fair to them, nor to the petitioners, to be dedicating this much time and effort towards picking directors. Maybe it should be spread out over a longer period of time, or, better yet, made shorter in general.

- Find a way to make petitions more transparent. I don't know how to do this, but it would reduce the possibility of taking things personally immensely. It's very hard to not know why you were rejected.

Hypothetical:

- I think the petition system is deeply flawed. Obviously the intention behind them comes from a good place of boards trying to get to know as many people as possible and give them a chance to state their case but that is not what happens. Petitioners are given five minutes in which they are grilled as to why they think they are right for the job, left to think about the experience for a week, and then more often than not given the shock of rejection with little to no explanation as to why. I don't know what the alternative is, but there needs to be a different way to go about this that doesn't make a large portion of the theatre community feel rejected for a couple days. Maybe the format of the actual petition needs to change. Sit down and have a conversation with the petitioner instead of popping questions at them from all sides. I don't know the best way to do this or if it's reasonable, but something different needs to be done because the current format just doesn't work. It takes too much of an emotional toll on the community as a whole.

That was very long, but I guess it's how I feel. What are your thoughts?

Just an interesting thought of tech week curfews, in response to your comment, Jesse, about getting everything done. I think that's a totally fair point. There are plenty of times in which a show feels like it will not get done without some serious overtime from involved people. I don't really offer any alternatives to that existing as it does based on the current setup of the system. That system being load in all day Sunday, every designer trying to do all of their work in 4 days and 3 nights and actors and directors needing precious time in the space.

I do think there is hope though! One of the goals of the reduction of the StuCo season was to alleviate the strain on designers and those unbelievably dedicated people who find themselves pilled up with 5 back to back tech weeks. So maybe, next year, there will be a few more hands around every team to make some of that work go more quickly. As for other solutions? I'd say most of them would sound rather unappealing (not that they aren't possible): longer times in the spaces meaning less shows so teams can have longer, less tech heavy shows, fewer shows period, etc. Notice those are the same unpleasant answers to a lot of the other difficult questions.

So, petitions are all done.

This **** is weird. It's political, it gets personal, it can be really hurtful and really surprising.

What do you think we as a community can work on to make this process better? Obviously the numbers don't work out for StuCo to enable every petitioner to be on a board, produce, or direct. And based on the strain on / scarcity of our designers/managers/other production team members, we know that the answer is certainly not to add more fully produced shows. But leadership in StuCo is really invested in trying to make this a more positive and less stressful experience for all involved.

I'll start with a small suggestion: I think we should change the day of the week on which conferrals occur and board members/producers/directors are announced. When I did not get on a board my freshman or sophomore year, I was devastated. My freshman year, the results were published literally while I was in a class with a person on the board I wanted to be on, and the person who actually got the spot I so desperately wanted. I was able to get over it before too long, sure, but it felt really unfair to have the results inflicted on me when I had to spend the whole day in class with my peers.

I'd suggest that conferrals should occur on Sunday morning, results should be posted by Sunday afternoon, so we have the evening and overnight to respond in our own private space before being forced into 140-2s and acting classes filled with faces that bring up hard feelings.

What are your thoughts on this and other ways to respond to the harshness of petition season?