Not quite the press I wanted, but…

Welcome all of you visiting for the first time as a result of Time Out Chicago’s recent article that quoted this blog. For those of you that have no idea what I am talking about, click here. The post they quoted is here.

Before I go on, if you want an idea of what this blog attempts to do, please feel free to browse through the archives. I especially want to point out this post from February 13th, as I feel it is important.

Ok, back to the Time Out article:

First, lest anyone get the impression that I started this since I am quoted first: to the best of my knowledge, Tony Adams was the first one gutsy enough to state publicly any problems he experienced, at Bailiwick and other companies. I think that the reason that many others weighed in was that they wanted to support someone who was, indeed, risking much by stating his experiences. I am not able to publicly air my experiences, good or bad, at specific theatres, due to my running BackstageJobs.com. My reasoning for not posting mine or others experiences is based on my belief (hope?) that, as the diet ads say in their disclaimers, “results not typical. Your experience may vary.” As I have said before: one person’s summerstock-from-hell could be someone else’s favorite gig.

And, for full disclosure, I have never worked at Bailiwick, but part of the reason for that was due to hearing those rumors from nearly the moment I started looking for theatre work in Chicago, and that was 16 years ago.

I think this speaks to a major problem at several theatres in Chicago, as well as across the country. Whether the rumors are true or not no longer matters if it is keeping people away. If those you respect tell you that Theatre X’s checks bounce, and that to cut back on people running to the bank the check is drawn on, the theatre switched banks to one that has a single branch 30 miles away; or that lighting companies have come in and pulled their equipment mid-run due to non-payment of the rental fee; or that you might be pressured to purchase the props/costumes/equipment/material you need from your own pocket with the promise that it will be reimbursed; well, you are probably going to believe them.

Rumors are tricky things. They grow exponentially, but if no subsequent evidence comes up, they tend to die out. This is why theaters that might once have experienced difficulty paying on time have that rumor fade the longer they get the checks out in a timely manner. There is one large company in town that I know of that had “financial problems” rumors going on for a few years after they managed to get themselves stable. Now the rumor has changed from “they are really bad at budgeting” to “they used to be really bad at budgeting.”

But if the rumor persists, true or not, then the company has a problem they need to fix. The appearance of a problem is a problem in itself. Especially if the same stories keep coming out about the same problems, but with different people being wronged from the last time. If the people involved are people you know, and can confirm what they experienced, why would you risk putting in the time and energy in the hope that all that you heard was wrong? Even if it has been 5 years since the last check bounced, having it happen again to a freelancer only serves to make everyone forget the 5 years of fiscal responsibility, and assume that the problem has continued all this time.

Big problems create longer lasting rumors. For instance, I have heard 3 different lighting designers tell me of the show they worked on where the paycheck never came. They continued to design and program the show with the promise that the check would be there at first preview, then at third preview, and then “definitely at opening.” These three designers, each designing at different theatres on different shows for different companies at different times, all arrived at their theatres early, saved the show(s) to disk, pulled the disk out, and ERASED THE SHOW FROM THE LIGHTING BOARD. They then waited until the SM or PM arrived to inform them that there would be no lighting for the show until they had a check in their hand. In at least 2 cases, they were the only ones to get a check that night (though others had been given the same promises runaround).

Now, if you heard this, even if it was the only bad thing anyone had told you about a theatre, would you be inclined to accept work there? Would you not repeat the story to others, since you heard it directly from the person that was affected? Do these troubled theatre companies not understand that a few kind and “surprised” words will not erase the bad reputation that they have acquired?

Reputations are made by actions. They can be changed by actions.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, February 27th, 2008 at 9:49 pm and is filed under Chicago, General, media, problems. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.