The Development Gap: When the Next Step Is Clear but the Money Isn’t

The Development Gap: When the Next Step Is Clear but the Money Isn’t

Most experienced theatermakers know that different projects need different development rooms.

A reading can help us hear structure and language.

A workshop can test staging, scene-to-song integration, transitions and theatrical storytelling.

A cabaret presentation can put songs and concept in front of an audience before an entire musical is ready to stand on its feet.

A showcase can allow more developed work to demonstrate what it might become in production.

We know this.

The harder question is increasingly not what does the work need next?

It is:

Who is going to pay for it?

That question sits underneath almost every conversation I am having about new work right now.

This month alone, I have projects in very different places in the pipeline. We recently heard Act Two of SECRETS, a play still being developed by a writer in Brisbane, Australia. We have musicals moving through cabaret development. Other projects are being prepared for our 2027 Showcase season.

In most cases, identifying the next useful developmental step isn’t particularly mysterious.

Finding the resources to make that step happen is.

 

The Artistic Question and the Financial Question

Ideally, development decisions would be made primarily on artistic grounds.

What does the piece need?

What question are we trying to answer?

What combination of actors, directors, musicians, designers or space would allow us to investigate it?

But every one of those questions eventually becomes a budget.

Actors need to be paid.

Rehearsal space costs money.

Musicians cost money.

Directors, music directors, stage managers, designers and producers need to be compensated.

A presentation requires a venue.

A showcase requires considerably more.

And a production requires an entirely different level of capitalization.

So the creative producer is constantly working with two parallel questions:

What does the work need?

and

What can we actually afford to give it?

Those answers are increasingly different from each other.

 

The Development Pipeline Has a Funding Problem

For decades, nonprofit and regional theaters have played an essential role in developing new American work.

But institutions themselves face enormous financial pressures.

When budgets tighten, risk becomes harder to justify.

A theater still has salaries, rent, insurance, production costs and audiences to maintain. A recognizable title or familiar musical may offer a far more predictable path to ticket sales than an unknown new play by a writer audiences have never heard of.

That doesn’t necessarily mean an artistic director doesn’t believe in new work.

It means belief still has to survive a budget meeting.

And that creates an increasingly difficult gap.

Writers need productions in order for their work to become known.

Theaters often need work to arrive with some degree of recognition, development or financial support before they can afford to take the risk.

Somebody has to finance the space between those two things.

Increasingly, I find myself asking:

Who?

Money Doesn’t Always Follow Merit

There is another side to this problem that we don’t talk about nearly enough.

Funding can move work forward.

But the presence of funding does not necessarily mean that the work is ready to be produced.

I’ve seen projects reach showcases and productions largely because someone had access to the money necessary to put them there.

And I’ve seen much stronger projects remain in development because those resources weren’t available.

This is not about artistic readiness.

The ability to raise money is important. Producing is impossible without it.

But capital should not become our substitute for artistic judgment.

A production with sufficient financing can rent a theater, hire actors, engage designers and buy advertising.

However, none of those things can solve a story problem.

And once a project reaches a sufficiently public stage, everyone involved has a professional stake in what is being presented.

That is one reason I have become increasingly careful about what CreateTheater puts into a showcase or production.

A showcase should not simply mean:

The writer could afford a showcase.

It should mean:

We believe this work is ready to benefit from one.

So Where Does That Leave New Work?

This is the question I don’t think our field has solved.

If the nonprofit model is increasingly financially stretched, if commercial development requires access to private capital, and if writers themselves are expected to shoulder more of the cost of developing their work, we risk creating a theater in which access to development depends too heavily on access to money.

That should concern all of us.

Because the long-term health of the theater depends upon the quality and range of the work entering the pipeline.

Margo Jones put it simply:

“Our theater can never be stronger than the quality of its plays. We must, therefore, have a great number of good plays.”

I keep coming back to that.

Jones, Nina Vance and Zelda Fichandler were among the pioneers who helped create an alternative to a theater ecology dominated by the commercial marketplace: professional resident theaters where artistic value did not have to be determined solely by whether a production could immediately make money. That movement grew with substantial philanthropic and eventually public support.

Now Oskar Eustis, one of the most prominent artistic leaders of the institutions that movement created, has said bluntly that “the American nonprofit theater movement is over.” His argument is not that nonprofit theaters will disappear, but that the national consensus that once supported serious, subsidized, non-market-driven theater has disappeared.

Maybe he’s right.

But if the movement is over, I think we have to ask a much harder question:

What happened to it?

Was it simply starved by the disappearance of public and philanthropic support?

Did escalating labor, real-estate and production costs make the original model impossible?

Does the public no longer value live, professional theater on stage?

Or, have some of our nonprofit institutions grown so large—and so expensive to sustain—that maintaining the institution itself can compete with the artistic mission it was created to serve?

Those questions become particularly uncomfortable when resources for developing new work are disappearing while leadership compensation at some of our largest nonprofit theaters can reach seven figures.

That fact alone does not explain the crisis. But it should make us willing to ask what our nonprofit theaters are funding, whom they are serving, and what we expect the word nonprofit to mean in 2026.

Because the original dream was never simply to build institutions.

It was to build a theatrical ecology in which artists could make important work that the commercial marketplace alone would not support.

If that system is truly ending, then the answer cannot simply be to return development to whomever has the deepest pockets.

Otherwise we have come full circle.

The writers who can finance their own productions will get produced. The writers with wealthy patrons or powerful connections will get developed. And excellent work without access to capital will remain on the page.

Who benefits from that pay to play model?

Which brings me back to Margo Jones.

“Our theater can never be stronger than the quality of its plays.”

If we still believe that, then perhaps the most important question facing those of us producing new work isn’t whether the old nonprofit model is over.

It is:

What are we going to build in its place—and how do we make sure artistic merit, rather than access to money, still has a chance to determine what stories we get to tell on stage?

Not sure what your project needs next?

Subscribe to The Producers Room for weekly guidance on moving new work forward.

Developing a new musical?

You Have to Produce for the World You’re In

You Have to Produce for the World You’re In

There is a point in developing a new play when the questions stop being mostly about the script.

You are no longer asking just:

Does this scene work?
Is the character clear?
Is the structure holding?
Have we earned this moment?

You start asking different questions.

Can the actor make that costume change?

Can we physically accomplish on stage what is called for on the page?

Does this scenic idea actually serve the story?

What theatrical elements does this transition require? At what expense?

And now, more and more, what is happening outside the theater that could affect the people who are working inside the theater?

As a producer, that last question has been on my mind a lot lately.

As we move The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue toward its Off-Broadway production this fall, I have been reminded over and over again that a producer does not get to produce in an imaginary world.

You have to produce for the world you’re in.

And the world you are in becomes part of the production, whether you want it to or not.

The Outside World Will Walk into the Room

Even though we have been working on this script for months, as we begin moving toward production, the context surrounding the  work has become impossible to ignore.

For instance, casting has been more complicated for us than any of us expected.

Not because there is a shortage of talented actors – especially in NYC, the world’s largest casting pool.

But because the subject matter of this play exists inside a very particular cultural and political moment.

Evidently, actors in another similarly-themed production dealt with social-media harassment because of the material they were performing, and word had gotten around inside the acting community.

That kind of experience does not remain abstract when you are asking actors to join your own company.

Suddenly, what might once have seemed like a straightforward casting conversation becomes something else.

How comfortable will an actor feel associating publicly with this material?

It was my responsibility as a producer to keep everyone safe.

I had already built additional layers of security into the budget, but I had to think about their entire experience. We called upon the theater to add additional security measures so that our cast and production crew would feel as safe as possible.

There are additional production questions that we need to address right now:

What needs to be added to the production budget because the world outside the theater has changed?

How do I make my team feel as safe as possible during the run of the production?

None of these questions alter the artistic reason for doing the play.

But they absolutely change the way I have to produce it.

That is part of the job.

Production changes the script, too

At the same time, something much more ordinary has been happening.

The design team has started asking practical questions.

Costume changes.

Transitions.

Physical logistics.

What can actually happen in the space.

How quickly something needs to happen.

Whether an idea that reads perfectly well on the page creates an impossible or awkward sequence in performance.

This is one of the clearest signs to me that a project has crossed an important developmental threshold.

Earlier in the process, the questions were largely about story, character, tone and intention.

Now the questions are increasingly about execution of the idea.

That does not mean the script suddenly becomes untouchable.

Quite the opposite.

This is where production reveals the final changes a script needs to make.

They are different changes.

You are no longer rewriting because you are tweaking how to tell the story better.

You are adjusting because the story now has to live inside bodies, costumes, scenery, time, space and an actual theater.

That distinction matters.

It is one of the reasons I often ask writers:

Are the remaining questions writing questions, or production questions?

That tells me where the work actually is in its development.

And then there is the audience

At the end of my long week I had a conversation with a filmmaker who is interested in maybe writing for the theater.

What interested him was the immediacy of the experience.

In film, there can be a tremendous amount of distance between creating the work and then watching an audience view it.

Theater is different.

The audience is right there in the same space with you, while you’re creating it on stage.

You know when they are with you.

You know when they are restless.

You know when something is funny because you hear the laugh.

You know when something has made people uncomfortable. and you know when

And you know when your work lands – because the tone of the room changes. .

That is part of what makes theater risky (and it’s why the Greeks eventually shut theater down).

It is also part of what makes theater matter.

A production does not simply present a story.

It puts a group of people in a room together and asks them to experience that story at the same time.

That shared experience resonates, and feels increasingly important to me.

Especially right now.

The producer’s job is larger than protecting the script

When people talk about producing, the conversation often turns quickly toward money, schedules, contracts and logistics.

Those things are certainly part of it.

But creative producing also means protecting the conditions in which the work can succeed.

That means understanding the script.

Understanding the writer as an artist.

Understanding the audience.

Understanding what the design is telling you.

Understanding the director, and what the actors need.

And understanding the world the production is about to enter.

Sometimes the world changes faster than the production does.

The producer has to notice, and has no control over that.

We shouldn’t chase every cultural shift or change the work just because someone might object to it.

Instead, it means being awake.

It means knowing what you are really asking of your collaborators.

It means anticipating the practical consequences of the choices you make, on your entire team.

And it means recognizing that once a play moves toward production, the work is no longer happening only between the writer and the page.

It is entering the world. And the world will take notice.

Development Prepares the Work for that Moment

This is one of the reasons I believe so strongly in development, and in theater itself.

A reading is not the goal.

A workshop is not the goal.

A showcase is not the goal.

Each one is a room where you can answer a different kind of question.

Eventually, though, the project has to leave the safety of development and meet the demands of production.

And at that point, the question becomes larger.

Not simply:

Does the play work?

But:

Can this play work here, with these people, for this audience, in this moment?

That is the question I am living with right now.

And I suspect it is one of the most important questions I can ask as a producer.

Because we never get to produce theater in the world we wish existed.

We have to produce in the actual world we live in.


Working on a new musical?

On September 27, CreateTheater’s next NYC Musical Development Workshop 3, Back Into the World, looks at another moment when the work has to re-enter the room: the opening of Act Two.

After intermission, your audience comes back with expectations. Your characters come back changed. Your musical has to regain momentum and make clear why we should keep following the story.

That is the work we’ll be exploring together.

Not sure what your project needs next?

Subscribe to The Producers Room for weekly guidance on moving new work forward.

Developing a new musical?

You Don’t Have to Live in NYC to Develop Your Work in NYC.

You Don’t Have to Live in NYC to Develop Your Work in NYC.

New York Development. Global Community.

One of the things I find myself thinking about more and more is geography.

For a long time, most serious theater development was tied to New York. If you wanted to develop a new musical professionally, the assumption was that you needed to be here — physically here in NYC — within reach of the rehearsal rooms, the readings, the writers’ groups, the industry conversations, and the people, in order to be successful.

That is no longer completely true.

Geography no longer has to limit access to a professional development process.

You don’t have to live near New York to develop your work in New York.

At least in the beginning.

CreateTheater is not an online education company. ETC is not simply a collection of Zoom classes. What we do is make it possible for serious writers, wherever they live, to develop their scripts while remaining connected to a professional New York theater development process.

The Experts Theater Company — ETC, our Theater Residency program within CreateTheater — attracts writers from all over the world because they can belong to a NYC-based professional theater company that is actively developing their work without having to move to one of the most expensive cities in the world.

That is a very different proposition from taking an online class.

It means becoming part of an ongoing professional artistic community.

Our Writers Live Across the Globe

Jarlath Jacobs lives in Como, Italy. She is continuing to develop JACQUES AND JILL with us after we produced an earlier version in 2022. She returned to the work because she wanted to make significant changes to the story — and ETC gave her a community that already knew the musical and could help her rediscover it.

Wendy Bichel joins us from Mexico.

Mark Sherry works with us from Brisbane, Australia.

The geography is different, but the artistic conversation remains centered in New York: professional development standards, industry expectations, production readiness, readings, workshops, and the larger question of how a project moves toward presentation and production.

And the community matters just as much as the artistic work.

That became especially clear to me when Michael Riggs, one of our writers from Adelaide, Australia, came to New York for a visit.

By the time he arrived, he already knew so many people through ETC that he didn’t feel as if he were arriving in a strange city and starting from scratch.

He had a whole circle of friends waiting for him.

We ended up throwing him a party at citizenM in Times Square.

And I remember thinking:

This is part of what we have built.

Not just a program.

Not just a series of readings.

A professional artistic community that exists across geography — and becomes very real when people finally find themselves in the same room.

Theater Artists Need More Than Feedback

I knew even before the pandemic that writers needed more than notes.

They needed continuity.

They needed people who knew the work over time, who could remember what the previous draft was trying to solve, and who could say:

“Yes, this scene is stronger — but now you have to clean up the opening number, because this changes it.”

That kind of feedback is different because it comes from people who understand the larger developmental journey.

Writers need to know what their next question actually is.

They need colleagues who show up for their readings.

And they need an artistic community they can trust.

That sense of belonging is a huge part of ETC.

If you are writing a musical in Brisbane, Como, Mexico, or somewhere else entirely, you may have excellent local collaborators. But you may still want to remain connected to the New York theater ecosystem — not because New York is the only place where theater matters, but because it remains an important professional marketplace and development center for new work.

Technology simply makes it possible to stay in that conversation.

It expands the room.

What it does not do is remove the need for standards.

Professional Development — Through Zoom?

A Zoom room is not automatically a professional development room.

A reading is not valuable simply because people showed up to read it.

A workshop is not useful simply because someone gave you notes.

The value comes from the rigor and professionalism of the process.

Who is in the room?

How experienced are they in developing new musicals or plays?

What question are you trying to answer?

What happens after the reading?

Does the writer understand what needs to change?

Does the writer understand what the next step should be?

Can the writer trust the feedback?

These are the same questions I would ask if the creative team were sitting around a table on 42nd Street at the West Bank Cafe after a reading instead of talking on Zoom.

It matters who is in the room.

The geography has changed.

The artistic expectations have not.

The digital room can also strengthen the development process because writers do not have to wait until they can afford to fly to New York, rent housing, and organize an entire trip just to keep the work moving.

They can continue developing the script at home while staying inside a professional process.

Then, when the project reaches the point where it truly needs bodies in a physical room — staging, choreography, design, audience response, production rhythm — we make that happen here in New York.

“Zoom Theater” Will Never Replace Live Theater

Online development is not a replacement for live theater.

It is a way to get the work ready for the moment when live development becomes necessary.

There are questions you can answer around a virtual table.

There are questions you can only answer when actors step into the roles in a physical room.

And there are questions you cannot answer until an audience is sitting in front of you.

For some work — especially scripts that depend heavily on physical comedy, choreography, staging, or a particular performer’s relationship with an audience — Zoom has obvious limits.

Online development is not right for every project.

But eventually, every script needs to meet an audience.

A creative producer’s job — and an artistic director’s job — is to know what each project needs next.

The writer may be in Brisbane, Como, Mexico City, or Manhattan. What matters is the rigor of the process, the quality of the artistic conversation, and the people who stay with the work over time.

Because serious work still needs a serious room, with experienced people in it.

And serious artists need an artistic home.

That is what we have built in ETC.

I am deeply proud of this company and of the talented theater artists around the world who make it what it is.

You don’t have to live in New York to develop your work in New York anymore.

But you do need a community that knows the work and can help you move it forward.

Not sure what your project needs next?

Subscribe to The Producers Room for weekly guidance on moving new work forward.

Production Begins Long Before Opening Night

Production Begins Long Before Opening Night

There is a moment when a developing play officially becomes a production.

A theater is booked. Contracts are signed. Designers are hired. Rehearsal dates go onto the calendar. Suddenly, the project begins to look real to everyone outside the room.

But that is not where the production began.

A show does not suddenly become “a production.” Production readiness is created over time—through rewrites, readings, difficult conversations, artistic decisions, relationships, and the steady work of figuring out what the play is trying to become.

That work is development.

And development is not separate from production.

Production is the result of development.

As a creative producer, my job is not simply to find a script I like, raise money, hire a team, and put it onstage.

My job begins much earlier.

It begins with helping a talented writer understand what is already alive inside the work, what is not yet fully communicating, and what the play will require in order to live and breathe in a room—and eventually in front of an audience.

That requires producing experience.

It also requires dramaturgy.

Believing in a Play Is Only the Beginning

Every new production begins with belief.

Someone has to recognize the potential in a script before the work is fully visible to everyone else. Someone has to believe that the writer’s voice matters, that the story belongs onstage, and that the project is worth the years of effort it may take to get there.

But believing in a show is not the same as determining that it is ready to produce. That second decision demands much harder questions.

Does the play sustain its dramatic tension from beginning to end?

Are the characters sufficiently distinct?

Do their relationships deepen and change?

Does each scene accomplish something necessary?

Do the act endings land with enough force?

Is the theatrical language of the piece clear?

Can the central ideas be translated into physical choices onstage?

And do we understand the experience we are asking the audience to have?

The Work Before the Workshop

Two weeks ago, playwright Debbie Goodstein and I brought The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue into a table-reading workshop as we continued preparing for its Off-Broadway production.

We had already worked intensely to get the script ready for that room.

Debbie had been rewriting. We had been discussing structure, character, tone, politics, family, faith, assimilation, surrealism, and the theatrical world of the play. We had made significant decisions, tested ideas, discarded others, and continued asking what the play needed.

That work mattered because a table reading is only as useful as the questions you bring into it.

The goal was not simply to hear actors read the play.

It was to hear what the script was doing.

There is an important difference.

When actors embody the characters, the play begins to produce information that is difficult to access on the page. You hear where energy rises and falls. You hear when characters occupy the same tonal territory. You hear when a scene turns too late—or does not turn at all.

You stop evaluating the sequence of scenes and begin experiencing the dramatic organism as a whole.

That is where dramaturgical skill becomes practical. You listen not only for whether something is “good,” but for what function it is serving, what pressure it is creating, and how it affects everything around it.

What the Room Revealed

The workshop allowed us to hear more clearly what each character needed to contribute to the larger dramatic structure.

Some characters needed to become more distinct from one another. Others needed to complement or challenge each other more effectively. In certain scenes, one character’s tone needed to be dialed down so that another character—and another part of the story—could come forward.

That does not necessarily mean cutting the strongest personality in the room. It means understanding the balance of the scene.

Who is carrying the dramatic action?

Whose perspective has not yet been heard? When can they speak up?

Are two characters creating useful tension, or are they simply repeating the same emotional note?

These are not abstract questions. They affect how the audience receives the play moment by moment.

We also looked carefully at all of the “buttons” at the end of each scene: the final line, image, revelation, or action that allows the scene to land and propels the audience into what comes next. By hearing the scenes in sequence, we understood what each one needed to accomplish before the next scene pushed more of the story forward.

The workshop also revealed that two scenes could be combined. On the page, they had appeared to serve separate purposes. In performance, we could hear that they were covering some of the same dramatic ground. Combining and editing them make the storytelling more concentrated. It will allow the scene to raise the stakes and give the play greater momentum.

Most importantly, we were able to experience the power of the end of Act One.

That ending had previously lacked the force the story demanded. The material was there, but the dramatic architecture hadn’t yet fully revealed it.

Debbie and I had worked and re-worked that scene many, many times, and it finally felt right enough for us to move it into the reading. We needed to hear it.

And hearing it out loud—she nailed it. It was magical.

I literally cried at the end of Act One. The moment landed with a resonance and emotional force that had not been there before. Everything we had been working toward—the pressure among the characters, the accumulating conflict, the deeper questions underneath the play—suddenly came together. All that work for that one moment at the end of Act One.

For the first time, I was not listening as a dramaturg/producer evaluating the structure. I was receiving it as an audience member.

That is the moment we all hope for in development: not merely recognizing that a problem has been solved, but feeling the play come fully alive in the room.

And once the play begins to live that fully in performance, the next questions change.

The work is no longer only about what is on the page. It becomes about how those discoveries will take physical form onstage—and how they will be communicated to an audience.

What Changes When Production Begins

As we move from development into production, the questions expand.

The script remains central, but it is no longer the only consideration.

Now we must begin asking how the work will exist physically onstage.

How will the actors move through the space?

What visual world supports the story? What will the set look like? 

How does the production communicate realism, memory, ritual, and surrealism?

How will the blue violinist live inside the theatrical language of the play?

How do we evoke the Upper West Side as a modern shtetl?

How do we dramatize the comfort of assimilation and its cost?

And how do we accomplish all of that within the realities of an Off-Broadway budget?

Wow. These are all producing questions, design questions, and dramaturgical questions, all at the same time.

Here’s the thing: a theatrical concept cannot remain an idea that only the writer, director, and producer understand.

It has to become visible. It has to become playable.

It has to speak to an audience that has not been inside our development conversations.

In August, we are moving more deeply into production design. We will begin translating the concepts we have spent so much time discussing into scenery, sound, lighting, costumes, movement, and space.

This is not the point where development ends, though.

It is where development takes physical form.

Artistic Vision Has to Meet Reality

Creative producing requires holding two truths at once: the artistic ambition must remain strong, but the production must remain possible.

A concept may be compelling, but can it be built? Can it function through the transitions of the play? Can the actors use it safely and fluidly? Can it be lit?

Does it deepen the storytelling—or merely decorate it?

And is it worth what it will cost?

A budget is not an unfortunate administrative matter that exists outside the art. A budget clarifies the art.

When resources are limited, the creative team has to determine which choices are essential to the audience’s experience and which are not. We are deciding those elements now, this week.

That discipline can be frustrating, but it can also make the work more theatrical. More imaginative.

The stage doesn’t need to reproduce reality literally. It needs instead to create a world in which the audience can believe, feel welcomed into, and then, hopefuly, be continually amazed by.

My job as a creative producer is to help the team locate the choices that carry the greatest dramatic meaning over to the audience, and then to help to make those choices possible in concrete terms. That is, in budget terms.

Fun, fun, fun. 

That is where artistic leadership meets practical leadership.

But then, that’s the work.

Production Readiness Is Built

A show becomes ready through accumulation.

One rewrite clarifies a relationship. One workshop reveals a structural imbalance. One actor exposes a tonal problem. One conversation opens a new thematic possibility. One design meeting turns an abstract idea into a stage image. One budget decision forces the team to identify what matters most and how to make it come alive, within our resources.

Production readiness is not “perfection.” It is not the moment when the script can no longer change. It will change up to opening night. 

It must change. That’s the process of development.

Debbie and I did not arrive at this production because the play was simply selected and placed onto a stage.

We arrived here by returning to the work. Over and over again.

By listening carefully. By asking difficult questions. By Debbie’s willingness to revisit the stories of Sholom Aleichem’s Tevye—the inspiration for this play—for what may truly have been the millionth time, and still remaining open to discovering something new.

We arrived here through my protecting the writer’s voice while also challenging the script to become more specific, more theatrical, and more powerful.

And we arrived here by understanding that the path from development to production is not a clean dividing line.

HA! Nothing even close.

It is one continuous artistic process. One question that, resolved, follows with another.

Because this art, this story, this concept, is worth it. The audiences are worth it.

This is the work of the creative producer: to recognize what might be possible before it is fully visible.

To bring the right people into the room, and then give them the resources to do their best.

To use a dramaturgical skill set to understand what the work needs—and what it does not.

To help the writer strengthen what is on the page, then listen as actors, directors, and designers begin translating those discoveries into performance, movement, sound, light, and space.

And finally, to help the play—this beautiful vision of Debbie’s that I believed in from the very beginning—take shape onstage in front of an audience.

And then – to watch their reaction as they experience the magic of telling stories on stage.

Production does not begin when the curtain rises.

It begins when someone takes a script seriously enough to stick with it. To question it. To protect it. To challenge it. To help it become fully theatrical.

But eventually, all of that work must meet an audience.

At the end of October, The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue by Debbie Goodstein will leave our development rooms and step onto an Off-Broadway stage. The play we have questioned, shaped, heard aloud, taken apart, and put back together will begin its next life in front of the people it was written for.

The tickets are not yet on sale. The website is still being built. Our designers are only beginning to turn a year’s worth of conversations and discoveries into a physical world.

But the production has already begun.

Over the coming months, I will be sharing more of that journey: the choices, the challenges, the discoveries, and the process of turning a script into a living theatrical event.

And when the doors finally open, I hope you will be there—not simply to see the finished production, but to encounter the work that all of us have been working, for so hard and for so long, to fully bring this story to life.

 

Follow our Journey to Opening Night!

Be the first to hear when tickets go on sale for The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue—and receive occasional behind-the-scenes updates as the production moves from development into rehearsal and performance.

Development Before Production

Development Before Production

Audiences see the finished production.

They see the actors, the set, the lights and the opening-night photographs. What they rarely see is all the work that happened before anyone bought a ticket: the revisions, readings, creative disagreements, difficult decisions and long conversations that shaped the production.

That is development.

And development must come before production.

Last week, we held a small private table reading of a new play I have been developing with Debbie, a talented writer and member of Experts Theater Company, the writers’ residency within CreateTheater.

I began working with her on this play in late 2025. From our first sessions, I saw once again her distinctive voice: clever contemporary dialogue interrupted by flashes of unexpected surrealism. The play is timely, engaging and funny—and I became convinced that it needed to be onstage.

Once we made the decision to move toward an Off-Broadway production, I engaged a general manager and an attorney, found an appropriate venue and reserved the dates.

But new work development rarely moves in straight lines.

The director we initially engaged had a very different interpretation of the play from our’s. Creative disagreement can be productive, but the director must still understand the essential identity of the work. When it became clear that the project was moving away from Debbie’s vision, we began a new director search.

We ultimately found someone who truly understands the play—and understands the vision Debbie and I share for it.

That change, however, meant returning back to the script, and back into rewrites.

First she scrubbed the text from the previous director’s interpretation, and we tried to get back the essence of the original draft that worked so well. The new director added some new comments, but had a previous commitment. While he was otherwise engaged we had to prepare the script for our private table reading to hear the new draft.

But the new draft wasn’t ready, held up from a death in her family. But we needed to get back to work.

For two intensive weeks, Debbie and I worked through draft after draft. She sent me new pages. I responded with comments on what I loved and where further revision was still needed. She addressed the notes and sent another draft. Then we began again the next day.

That cycle required tremendous dedication from the writer, and I deeply admire the energy, talent and trust she brought to the process.

My role was not to rewrite the play for her. It was to help her strengthen what was already distinctive about it.

In this case, that meant leaning further into the surrealism.

Because the play engages with current events, it could easily have become overtly political or overly literal. Its surrealistic theatrical language keeps it surprising, contemporary and fun. Instead of smoothing away the unusual elements, we made the decision to lean into them.

That is one of the most important principles of dramaturgy: development should not make every play sound the same. It should help the writer reveal more clearly what makes this particular play worth producing.

One of my favorite dramaturgy quotes is from Lynn M. Thomson, the dramaturg who worked with Jonathan Larson while he was writing RENT:

“Dramaturgical skill is generally expressed in process, [and] is about process, including those often indetectable contributions that transform moments in rehearsal or meeting rooms.”

 

Wearing Two Hats

When I develop a new play or musical, I am usually wearing two hats at once.

As a dramaturg, I advocate for the writer’s vision and ask whether the script is fully delivering on that vision.

Does the story work? Is the dramatic action clear? Is the tone consistent? Are the theatrical choices helping the audience enter the world of the play? Does the ending of each scene ‘button up’ the action and/or function of the scene?

As a producer, I am asking a different set of questions.

Where does this work belong? Who is its audience? What separates it from other current productions exploring similar subjects? What venue, director and production team will best serve it? Can the financing and infrastructure support the artistic vision? What elements should we highlight and lean into for marketing? How can we communicate what this play is about?

These two roles are deeply connected.

A producer cannot position a play effectively without understanding what makes it artistically distinctive. A dramaturg cannot ignore the practical realities of how the work may eventually be produced.

This is where experience, relationships and instinct matter.

 

Why Readings Matter

The private table reading gave us something the page alone could not: the opportunity to hear the play in the room.

Theatre is meant to be spoken, embodied and shared. A scene that appears clear on the page may feel confusing when actors read it aloud. A joke may land differently than expected. A surrealistic moment may suddenly make perfect sense.

A private reading is not a performance or a promotional event. It is a working room.

It allows the writer, director and producer to listen, investigate and decide what the play still needs before the financial machinery of production is fully underway.

Too often, writers are encouraged to pursue exposure before the work has had enough development.

But exposure is not the same as progress.

Sometimes the most valuable step is another draft, another conversation or another quiet reading around a table.

The process cannot be rushed. You can’t rush a show into production, and you shouldn’t try.

 

The CreateTheater Process

At CreateTheater, we begin with the work.

We develop new plays and musicals through dramaturgical conversations, revisions, readings and collaboration with professional theatre artists. We identify what makes a project distinctive, assemble the right creative team and consider where the work belongs within the larger theatrical landscape.

Then, when the script is ready—and when the financing and production structure are in place—we move toward the stage.

That process may take months. Sometimes it takes years.

Production is not the beginning of the work. It is the point at which the development work becomes visible.

This fall, we will bring The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue to Off-Broadway. Over the coming weeks, I will share more about how that journey unfolds—and how other CreateTheater projects are moving from script to reading, workshop, showcase and production.

Because a new play does not simply arrive onstage.

It is developed beforehand, one decision at a time.

Writers don’t need another class – they need a development room.

Writers don’t need another class – they need a development room.

Sometimes people ask me why I created CreateTheater.

I created CreateTheater because too many writers were trying to develop plays and musicals alone.

They had scripts. They had ideas. They had taken classes.

But they did not have access to the kind of ongoing development room that professional theater requires—especially if they lived outside New York.

CreateTheater was built to become that room online.

I was already developing new plays and musicals online since 2013. Why not turn it into a theater company?

A geographically independent company where writers could bring in their actual work, hear it discussed, receive dramaturgical guidance, and prepare the script for the next stage of development. Not another class. Not generic accountability. A sustained professional artistic process that focused on the play or musical itself, developed by a professional company that happened to be in NYC.

Turns out, this was a really helpful idea! We’re still going strong eleven years later.

But theater cannot live entirely online.

A script may be strengthened on Zoom, but eventually the words must enter the mouths and bodies of actors. Each writer needs to hear the rhythm of the spoken word, feel where the room’s attention shifts, and see what is actually happening in the “audience.”

Theater becomes theater when artists are together in the same space.

 

Development Reading Workshops

As I’m developing new work post-pandemic, more and more as a professional director/dramaturg we’re exploring the script in one-day or two day reading workshops. It’s an efficient, economical way to engage actors and a director with your script and foster a collaboration of artists for your development process.

That is why CreateTheater is expanding into one-day and two-day development reading workshops in New York City, where most of the casting  process takes place.

The online development room helps the writer prepare the script to enter the live room. Then, in person with actors, a director, and focused dramaturgical support, the work can be tested before the writer spends significant money on a showcase or production.

This is why development matters.

A reading should not simply prove that the script exists. It should reveal what the script needs next.

And the quality of your feedback will either delay your development process or help your script assemble a team that will move it forward faster.

That is why I created CreateTheater: to give writers access to a serious development process, wherever they live – and then bring the strongest work into the room where a professional creative team can make it truly come alive.

I welcome your thoughts and comments!