Theatre Design & Technology - Summer 2012 - 77

of theatre, pulling together most of the previous chapters in the book. I was particularly glad
to see that they included a drawing of a full-set
centerline section, which many drafting books
ignore altogether. In this context, the importance of the section view of a set cannot be questioned. There are multiple examples throughout
these two chapters as in the rest of the book.

CAd versus pencil
The authors discuss the merits of CAD versus
pencil drafting at length in the first chapter and
again later in the book. (I am not sure there is
anything to debate really.) Hard as they may try
to present both sides in a fair manner, it is clear
that their allegiance is to the computer. They
make an important point that learning the basics of drafting is no doubt easier by hand and
the basic skills transfer to the computer quite
easily. As well, they state unequivocally that the
standards and conventions are the same and
equally important whether drafting in CAD or by
hand. Since it is no doubt true that within the
next decade or so there will be fewer draftings

done by hand, it is critical for anyone pursuing
a career in theatre to have the know-how of CAD
drafting (among so many other computer applications).
Not surprisingly, the CAD chapter itself is
quite good. It starts with the basics of the common drawing commands and works through a
simple piece of scenery and the various ways in
which it might be manipulated. As a designer
who still drafts with a pencil, I was quite curious
to see how understandable this chapter might
be. I was not disappointed. Clarity is key, and
Shanda and Dorn follow through. The information is handled in such a way that anyone new to
CAD should be able to get a solid start in drafting on the computer.
Although I was very impressed overall, I
do have some quibbles with the book. The biggest issue for me is that much of the information is presented as a "rule," but more properly
should be categorized as a guide or in many
cases a matter of style. Examples: they specify
the general position of dimension lines, calling
for them to be 1/2˝ from the object line; lead-

summer 2012

ers are drawn "with a horizontal component . . .
then draw an oblique line." Hatching lines (they
call them "section lines") are specified to be
drawn at a specific angle. They want a border on
every page; to their credit, they provide a good
reason for this, but oddly enough none of their
examples shows a border. I have no objection to
any of these or the other information they provide, but context and allowances for personal
style are important. Perhaps this is a function
of drawing more with CAD, but it is important
to note that every designer does things uniquely.
As long as the standard conventions are being
used to communicate clearly, small differences
should not matter.
There are also occasional statements that
struck me as peculiar. In one case, the authors
state that the shop-drawn centerline section
should include "all overhead masking, suspending lighting, and other details of space use."
Why wouldn't the scenic designer automatically
include that same information? As another example, does anyone still use a protractor, which
is mentioned with the drafting tools?

theatre design

& technology

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Summer 2012