Theatre Design & Technology - Dec 1972 - 18

With this total space, the action is more expansive, and
the audience's view of it is, as a consequence, more variable, flexible, random. This focus is a far cry from the
fixed axial focus of Broadway's proscenium convention. It
produces a more consistent mix of theatre. It creates a
more essential and rustic experience - as opposed to the
opulent, and usually pretentious experience of the preserved 19th century proscenium tradition. The goal is to
make theatrical action part and parcel of the audience's
daily life, to re-orient and redefine the actuality of life by
means of a liberated, spontaneous, improvisational theatre. As the high priest of Environmental Theatre, Pol ish
director Jerzy Grotowski proclaims, "Free the theatre.
Make it a territory, a place for self-discovery." "The one
thing Environmental Theatre Should not be," designer
EUljene Lee has said, "is something fixed."
THE DESIGNERS AND ARCHITECTS
The designers of the environmental setting for
DUDE - Roger Morgan, Eugene Lee and Franne Leehave worked together to keep things flexible, loose and
variable for several years. They have collaborated at the
Trinity Square Repertory Company in Providence, at the
Theatre for the Living Arts in Philadelphia, and at the
Chelsea Theatre Center in Brooklyn wreaking environmental astonishment wherever they go. Eugene and
Franne Lee designed the funky setting and costumes for
Andre Gregory's masterly and moving ALICE IN WONDERLAND. Roger Morgan evolved a concept of "singlesource lighting" that is fundamental to the Environmental
Theatre's non-craft appearance. Eugene Lee designed a remarkable close presence - up against the slave deck,
mother-audience for the Chelsea Theatre Center's
SLAVESHIP_
The designers felt from talking with, and being inspired
by, DUDE author Gerome Ragni, that DUDE was even
less suited to a standard Broadway proscenium approach
than HAl R. The audience had to be directly involved in
DUDE's travels along the highway of life. It just wouldn't
do to have actors running around a multi-level set separated from the audience by a proscenium arch. They felt
that a unified theatre space was required, one which audience and performers could equally cohabit. Besides, it has
been their tradition to start by violating or negating almost every space they design for. It was natural then, that
the designers, with the blessings of Ragni, turned to a
total space setting of wood and steel. They had, after all,
done it before.
Five years ago Roger Morgan, then lighting designer for
Adrian Hall's Trinity Square Repertory Company, introduced Eugene Lee as scenic designer. At the time, the
company had two theatres, both of which requ ired renovation; the old Trinity Square Theatre, a lovely, intimate
thrust stage with seating wrapped around in almost a semicircle on two levels, and a hideous auditorium leased from
the Rhode Island School of Design. The auditorium was
long and narrow_ The last row seemed miles from the T.V.

screen sized proscenium arch. The capacity was more than
they needed and they had space to spare. So they floored
over the orchestra level to the main cross aisle. This invol ved a level change of only six feet from the first row of
the original orchestra up to the new deck. The principle
playing area was centered on the new deck, seating was
located on each side and in the loge that stepped up
sharply from the cross aisle. The stage was then converted
to a shop.
Early in 1970, the American National Theatre and
Academy (ANTA) invited Trinity Square to come to
Broadway for a two week run as part of a festival of
successful regional repertory theatre. Both Morgan and
Lee felt that much of the company's success was contingent on the spaces they played in, and all would be lost on
the big stage of the ANT A theatre. So with a handsome
grant from the National Endowment for the Arts to
finance the trip down from Providence and the new construction, the designers transformed the ANT A into a
theatre room similar in feeling to that at RISD. However,
the construction was far more elaborate. The entire orchestra level was brought up not merely to an orchestra
cross aisle, but to the first row of the balcony. Requirements of the New York City Building Code had to be met.
To aid them in this endeavor they engaged Leslie Cortesi,
then with Damaz, Pokorny, Weigel, Architects, now of
Pokorny and Pertz, Architects. And I in turn engaged
Henry M. Garsson, engineer and code consultant, to determine how this seemingly impossible feat could be accompi ished. The play staged at the ANT A received less acclaim than did the transformation of the theatre. It closed
nine days after its arrival, but Martin Gottfried wrote,
"visiting ANT A makes you feel as if you are in a resident
theatre in another part of the country. This feeling is so
striking that the creation of it may be the most successful
accomplishment of the entire festival." Members of the
Building and Fire Departments, however, warned us never
to try anything like that on Broadway again. They objected specifically to the tortured non-fireproofed wooden
stairway ascending to the deck, and to the fact that the
scaffolding supporting the deck was open to anyone with
a cigarette who might start a fire_
Two years later, Morgan called and said "Remember
the ANTAl We want to do it again". "You've got to be
kidding", I replied "Haven't you heard about the investigation at the Building Department? This is no time to try
something we were told never to try again." Morgan said,
"Come on, we can comply with their objections. We'll
enclose the scaffolding with a steel stud and sheetrock
partition and get some steel stairs made. If they want a
fireproof door at one end or the other, we'll put one in." I
said I was game if he was.

BUILDING THE HIGHWAYS FOR DUDE
One may properly ask why force this kind of theatre
onto the unsuitable stages of Broadway. Yet, the venturTHEATRE DESIGN AND TECHNOLOGY

DECEMBER. 1972

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Dec 1972