Theatre Design & Technology - Winter 2017 - Public - 28

LIMITS AND OPPORTUNITY
Throughout the Barnard College research, we have noticed that
transportation and storage are crucial when it comes to availability and accessibility of stock or reclaimed materials. In a place like
Manhattan, where space is scarce, it is difficult to maintain a comprehensive stock. Therefore, during the purchasing process, it is important to consider whether items bought for a show can be stored
indefinitely. Reused, reclaimed, or repurposed materials generally
take more effort to find and obtain. New items can often be bought
and shipped within a day, but reused items must be sourced and
transported (frequently by means of a van rental).
Tracking the expenditures and materials for shows is difficult.
Gathering the data from many sources and ensuring its accuracy is
not simple. A consistent documentation format for the production
members is critical, as is the commitment of designers and production team members.
With that in mind, the question then turns to how to motivate
design and production teams to participate in this difficult process
that appears to have few immediately tangible benefits. It is one
thing for an individual designer to change their own practice, it is
another to build a sustainable practice into a production or into the
institution of theatre. How do you incentivize sustainable design?
We can create budgetary guidelines, and best practices in
the production department. These types of external constraints
(space, money, time) are common, and they often actually
strengthen a design. How many designers have seen a show that
had too few limits mushroom into something chaotic and uninspired (think Spider-man: Turn off the Dark on Broadway)? Limits
are, indeed, opportunities in design. And if we begin to recognize the limits of the natural world outside of the theatre as part
of what can inform our work inside the theatre, we open up a
chance to create a new language for theatrical design, one that
considers the show and the moment at hand, and also the longerterm ramifications of what we do.
As designers and theatre makers, we must make it part of our
job to think of our work in a larger context-we must think about
the materials and objects we use, where they come from, what they
are made of, where they will go after we use them, and the impact
they have at each of these steps. We hope that thinking more carefully about where our objects and materials come from will help
create a closed loop design process for theatre. Though we may begin our process with an empty theatre, or an empty model box, linear design thinking can lead, very simply, to filling that box and then
depositing the contents in landfill. The design process must begin
with a consciousness that the box is not empty, that resources are
limited, certain materials already exist at the start of the process,
and making theatre is (and always has been) about responding to
the world we find around us. Creativity is always limited by budgets, available tools, the size of a theatre, and more. It's time to
start thinking of sustainability not as an exceptional difficulty, but
another necessary consideration that can ultimately strengthen
our shared endeavor to create meaningful, lasting theatre.

theatre design

& technology

W i n t e r 2 0 1 7

itself and the conceptual approach allowed for the idea
of reuse and reinvention to be integrated from the start,
and embraced by multiple members of the team. The set
for Stupid Fucking Bird was, by design, largely created by
using the back side of scenery designed for The Dingdong. The idea of using the elements that were already in
the theatre, of creating a conversation between the two
shows and the space, was followed through in props,
blocking of set moves, furniture choices, and more. By
using what we knew was going to be there, or what we
found when we actually moved into the theatre, we used
less overall, and, by many accounts, created a strong design that supported the show.
It is important to note, however, that the re-use
of objects found in the theatre in the case of Bird was
largely a conceptual, aesthetic, and logistical choice, not
solely an environmental one. In this case, the text and
the circumstances of the production (working in rep in a
theatre with no storage space) coincided to make greener choices logical. What happens when the text does not
obviously support such a choice? Is sustainability only
appropriate for certain shows?
While these questions cannot be answered here, it
is important to begin asking them, knowing that while
we make theatre, we are also part of a larger economy,
a global system that, like it or not, can increasingly no
longer ignore the impact of our material choices on the
natural world.
And, even as we as a community of theatre makers
are exploring these questions, it is clear that (as with
most decisions in the theatre), designing and producing
sustainably needs to be a collaborative effort. A single
designer can push for more sustainable choices. A single
shop can attempt to move towards a zero waste model.
These are important steps, and should not be disregarded. These are ways, in the words of McDonough and
Braungart, to produce designs that are "less bad." But it
is much more exciting and much more powerful to try
to create designs that are better than "less bad," where
the limits and difficulties raised by considering our impact fuel the work, contribute to the conversation, and
ultimately, strengthen the work.
Sandra Goldmark is a theatrical set and
costume designer, assistant professor of
professional practice at Barnard College. Her
designs, teaching, and social enterprise work
all focus on questions of material culture and
sustainability, exploring how the design and production
choices we make impact the world around us and shape the
narratives we create as artists, as individuals, and as a
society. Goldmark's theatrical designs have been nominated

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of Theatre Design & Technology - Winter 2017 - Public