Put "Arizona" Back into Arizona Theatre

Commentary on Other Desert Cities by Jon Robin Baitz - Arizona Theatre Company

Note up front that this is a commentary inspired by the show, not a review of the show itself. And if you're new to my writing, I would encourage you to check out where I'm coming from in my introductory post.

I liked Other Desert Cities just fine. I enjoyed the script when I read it (save the last scene which feels off tonally from the rest of the show; as if it's the Sixteen Candles Pretty in Pink of plays where an original ending focus-tested poorly so the current ending was created instead). And as I've described the production to friends, I found Arizona Theatre Company's rendition "adequately serviceable." And by that I mean, not bad (solid performances all around) but also nothing that is going to stay with me. But watching this production and reading through the program got me interested in another topic: the lack of "Arizona" in a lot of what Arizona Theatre Company does.

Not a single role in this production was cast from local talent. There seems to be this pervading belief at a lot of the Equity houses in town that Arizona talent just can't compare to the kind of talent New York or Los Angeles or some other major theatrical city (i.e. Chicago, Seattle, Minneapolis) can provide. As an artist who has seen a lot of theatre in this town (likely more than some Artistic Directors because they are often too busy running their companies, or in rehearsals, or even out of state on other directing gigs), I take great offense to that assumption. The talent is here. I've seen it first hand. And using it could save companies a lot of money.



Arizona Theatre Company famously (at least if you follow Arizona theatre news) had a million-dollar deficit at the end of their 2012-13 fiscal year. That's not the kind of thing that just creeps up overnight. I imagine there were plenty of warning signs along the way that just went unheeded in the lead up to that announcement. But as they have poised themselves as Arizona's Premiere Regional Theatre, there were also probably a lot of costs they couldn't cut: shows that they were committed two because of partnerships with other organizations. Two of my favorite productions last season across the Valley were Next to Normal and Clybourne Park, both of which were Co-Productions with other Regional Theatres.  And again, to the best of my recollection, neither of those productions featured local talent (save the miniscule walk-on role at the close of Clybourne Park that could have been - and often is - cast from one of the other seven actors in the show). That's twelve actors that the company had to provide housing and per diems for over seven weeks of performances (three in Tucson and four in Phoenix). Not exactly a small line item in a budget.

As I mentioned above, all three of these productions (as well as another recent favorite of mine Red) have been Co-Productions with other Regional Theatres. This likely reduced some of the costs associated with design elements like set and costumes. In these arrangements, production costs are typically shared between the two producers. Other Desert Cities, for example, was a co-production with Indiana Repertory Theatre. It would appear that the set and costumes were built down in Tucson for the ATC run down there, then trucked up here for the Phoenix engagement, and then were immediately shipped off to Indiana for a March 12 - April 5 run. And given that four of the five actors were making their ATC debut, but the understudies were Tucson-based, I would gather that the show was primarily cast from an Indiana (or LA/New York casting pool) but rehearsed in Tucson (adding another couple weeks of housing and per diem costs).

But what are the revenue gains by this kind of production decision? The one actor who had performed on the ATC stage before was here back in 1998. So you can't really market the actors of a show as familiar faces to your audience ("You loved John Doe in Last Year's Award-Winning Drama so we brought him back for you: our loyal audience."). They probably weren't sooooo amazing in that one episode of Law and Order they were in that anybody would recognize them, let alone decide their "star power" was worth dropping the money to see them in a play. And it is unlikely (though not impossible) that they have a lot of friends and family in town that would come out to support them. So you're left paying a lot of extra money for this out-of-state talent for things that you wouldn't have to pay using local talent. Yes, there'd still be some costs for a Phoenix actor in Tucson or a Tucson actor in Phoenix but casting locally would cut those line items nearly in half at least. And you potentially gain any kind of following that those actors have. Because trust me, I've heard the little old ladies in the lobby saying "Oh I love him, I'll see him in anything he does. If I was forty or fifty years younger..." (Not about me of course but that's beside the point.)

"But what about the talent and experience out-of-state actors bring with them?" you're asking. Well, imaginary reader, how is it any different than that of our local actors and actresses? As I watched Other Desert Cities, I thought of at least two other local actors I could have imagined seeing in each of the five roles. Our actors have their own talent and experiences, as well. Whether or not they've done a national tour or had one line in a television episode nobody saw doesn't matter if they can do the part. And the only thing keeping them from doing the part is this belief that Arizona actors are somehow inferior to these other locations.

This doesn't even get into the notion of the ego that someone from New York or L.A. might have. If someone considers themselves a New York actor, they're probably getting cast in an Arizona production because they're not getting cast in New York. But rather than appreciate that they've been given an opportunity to play a dream role, they focus on this idea that Arizona is beneath them and so why should they bother listening to what the Arizona director has to say and they phone in their performances and cash their checks and enjoy the weather and end up letting the Ensemble of local talent completely outshine them. We the audience are left with a lackluster performance that would have been a hundred times better if that Ensemble who was so hungry to show what they can do in this community were given the leading roles instead. And the company wasted a bunch of money on those per diem and housing costs for actors who never really left New York.

This post has largely harped on ATC for this issue as it is my most recent example and the spark for this conversation. But the scenario I just provided wasn't an ATC situation but rather my perception of how my own company's production of season opener RENT could have been better than it was. I can't confirm that's what happened, but that's sure what it looked like to me.

All four of our major Equity houses have gone through financial troubles in recent years (in my opinion) because they've forgotten how to live within their means.  There were some very plush years, but we're in a funding drought right now and you need to find a way to reign in the costs in if you want to weather the storm. You can only raise ticket prices so high before you tip the scales and people stop providing that income as well.

And as a member of this incredibly talented community, I believe putting the Arizona back in Arizona Theatre Company, the Phoenix in Phoenix Theatre and Actors Theatre of Phoenix, and the Southwest in Southwest Shakespeare Company would be a solid first step on this road to recovery. Ideally, you'd do it because you want to and believe in this community and not out of some kind of financial necessity but I really can't speak to why these companies make the decisions they do. I can only hypothesize that going this route would help balance some books; it's up to them to perform the experiment.