Theatre Design & Technology - Summer 1989 - 57

assignments are the penalty for not being good enough to
be cast; technical experience is not seen as an educational
priority in and of itself. In such an envirOIIDlent it is small
wonder that technologists are regarded as inferior beingsfailed actors. Another scenario suggests that technologists
are designers who have yet to land a design job, who are
still paying their dues, or who will never make it. Again,
they are considered inferior-failed or unfinished
designers.
ot surprisingly, professional theatres may perpetuate
the bias against technologists. Theatre managers complain
bitterly that degreed technicians are not happy working
extended hours for salaries often well below the m.inimum
wage. In summer companies, technicians' salaries rarely
equal those of actors, though the hours worked generally
far exceed those of the performers; among the worst off are
the costume technicians, whose salaries are usually the
lowest and whose hours are invariably the longest in the
company.
These messages are not lost on our young people. According to recent placement bulletins, university after
university cannot find graduate students in technical theatre. My colleagues across the country report that at
URTA (University/Resident Theatre Association) auditions last year, those seeking technical assistantships were
commonly outnumbered by recruiters needing their services. Many programs cannot buy graduate technologists
at any price. Often scenic and costume studio assistantships are held - reluctantly - by actors and directors in
training. An adm.inistrator from Florida recently observed
that the most expensive graduate students in the country
are quarterbacks, violinists, and theatre technicians 6
Students have seen and heard, and many are leaving
technical theatre. Our YOWlg technical problem-solvers
are moving to computer science, to business, to engineering, where they are prized after graduation as well as
before. They are leaving a theatre industry that offers them
what must seem to be a future as second-class citizens.
The once seemingly endless supply of replacement TDs
and costumers may finally be com.ing to an end.
At the same time, as the Dom-Aitken survey indicates,
growing numbers of mid-career technologists are speaking
ever more of burnout and seeking alternative careers. We
have never really figured out what to do with a TD whose
knees or heart finally give out, and few are waiting around
for the answer.
At this rate, colleges and universities may soon be graduating MFA-ed designers who have received inadequate
grounding in technology. I personally anticipate that our
college production programs will, in the absence of competent personnel to nJn the scenic and costume studios,
increasingly rely on "a plank and a passion." Or worse,
actors and audience will be imperiled by foolliardy efforts
to operate complex technical systems with ill-trained
workers. And, as few technologists are graduated and
qualified, it won't take long for the crisis to reach professional theatres.
I have been told that those who do not love theatre
should leave it. I will not argue that. But why do we expect
theatre technologists to love it so much more than actors,
directors, or designers? Why - in the face of so many messages that they, after all, are not artists, not intellectuals,
not equals?
Why should intelligent, creative, problem-solving
young adults seek careers in the fields of technical theatre?

"The owner's daily
use of the faeility
is of prime
ilnportanee
as we plan the
teehnieal systems."
-Briall Re!lko/?{ MAGNUM Desigll

MAGNUM Design-Design, consulting and
system integration for theatrical and multi-use
facilities. Stage contracting and project
supervision for all technical systems.

M{\Q~~M
170-A Ottley Dri"e, ]\!E * Atlanta, Georgia 30324
(404) 872-0553 FAX (04) 75-5629

For love of the art? Why should they love it so much when
their very colleagues may undervalue them and their menial work? Can theatre survive if we divide ourselves into
enemy camps of artists and "techies"? I trunk not. Unless
we in the educational theatre community are wise enough
to stand together, we will ultimately fall.
SOME SOLUTIONS

In both commercial and not-for-profit theatres, there are

tightly held budgets for labor and materials. After-hours or
weekend calls will bring budget-breaking overtime
charges for union labor. Work simply must be executed
within budget, at least if the artists responsible want to
work very often.
In educational theatre, we commonly fail to recognize
that we also have firm labor budgets. Our students and
volunteers have conIDutted to us a linuted amount of their
time. Our institutions pay us for a linuted quantity of
ours. We, too, exceed the labor budget at great risk: we
establish false and umeasonable e),.'pectations about what
we can and should do, and we teach by example a disregard
for technologists and their essential skills.
Establislung the actual number of hours in labor budgets may be difficult. To do it, we will have to exanune
very carefully our basic expectations of our students and
our colleagues. How many studio hours is the faculty
designer paid for? And the TD? And the costumer? It may
be ducking the issue to say they are paid for the job, not for
the hours, since limits are set on the teaching hours of
other faculty members who are also contracted by the job,
not the hour.
TD&T

SUMMER 1989

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Summer 1989