What a Workshop Production Can Teach You About Your Show

What a Workshop Production Can Teach You About Your Show

There comes a point in the development of a new musical when you have learned almost everything you can learn from the page.

You’ve rewritten it.

You’ve heard it read aloud.

You’ve talked through structure, character, stakes, songs, pacing, and intention.

You may even have had an industry reading.

And then you reach the next question:

What happens when this actually becomes theater?

That’s where we are right now with LITTLE THINGS, a new musical with book by David H Smith and music by David H Smith and Tom Fosnocht.

I’ve been working with David on this show for almost three years, beginning with an early draft he brought into CreateTheater in 2023. In 2024, LITTLE THINGS received an Industry Reading at the CreateTheater New Works Festival at Playhouse 46 in Manhattan. Earlier this year, we held another table-reading workshop to look closely at the newest draft.

Now, on August 29, the entire musical will go in front of an audience in a workshop production in Philadelphia, directed by Michelle Tannenbaum.

And at this stage of development, I’m not primarily interested in whether people “like” the show.

I want to know what the show does, what it says when it’s onstage.

 

A Personal Story Has to Become an Audience’s Story

David began writing LITTLE THINGS partly as a way of processing the pain of his own divorce.

That personal connection is one of the things that gives the musical its emotional truth.

But it also created one of our central developmental challenges.

When you are writing from lived experience, there is a natural impulse to say, “But that’s what really happened.”

And my response, again and again, has essentially been:

That isn’t the most important question.

The question is whether what happened serves the story you are trying to tell now.

Theater is not a deposition. It doesn’t owe the audience a transcript of reality.

It owes them a story.

That can be difficult for writers working from autobiography because changing an event can sometimes feel like changing the truth. But dramatic truth and factual accuracy are not always the same thing.

Our job was to preserve the emotional truth of David’s experience while building something larger than one man’s divorce.

The musical needed to become a story that could belong to other people, too.

Not simply, “This is what happened to me.”

But:

“This is what it can feel like when life falls apart — and what it might take to build a new one again.”

That distinction changed the development of the show.

 

What Is the Audience Supposed to Leave With?

Divorce is not exactly an inherently cheerful subject. A musical centered on the collapse of a marriage can become emotionally heavy very quickly.

But thankfully, David was never interested in keeping the audience in despair. Instead, the deeper idea behind LITTLE THINGS is that life can continue after enormous disappointment.

Relationships change.

Families change.

People hurt one another.

People surprise one another.

And sometimes, after the life you had planned on disappears, another life can begin.

David and I had to think not only about what the musical was about, but about the experience we wanted to give the audience. If the destination is hope, the journey cannot be two hours of relentless pain followed by a hopeful final song. (God help us.)

The hope has to exist somewhere in the DNA of the show.

So, part of our development process has been continually looking for opportunities to bring more fun into the storytelling.

More humor.

More theatricality.

More buoyancy.

More songs that give the audience a chance to breathe, to laugh, and to have some fun.

More moments where the musical remembers that even during very difficult periods of our lives, absurdity, joy, attraction, friendship, surprise, and laughter still exist. The music is upbeat and pop-inspired, with numbers like, “Get a Test,” and the villainous attorney Beatrice Otch’s (Bea Otch) song describing how “The Ends Justifies the Means.”

That doesn’t make the painful material less truthful.

But in many ways, it makes it much more human.

When you’re going through a divorce you have to see the humor in the situation sometimes, right?

 

Now We Need to See It

This is why a workshop production matters.

Some questions simply cannot be answered around a table.

One of the things I’m particularly interested in seeing in Philadelphia is how the flashbacks in Act One function in performance.

They do important work.

They establish the world.

They give us history.

They help us understand the marriage, the characters and the relationships that have brought these characters to the present moment.

But much of that material is expositional and world-building rather than actively driving the present-day plot forward.

On the page, you can analyze that intellectually. You can ask whether every scene contains necessary information.

You can cut.

You can rewrite.

You can rearrange.

But theater is experienced in time.

The real question is:

What does it feel like to sit through it?

Do the flashbacks feel theatrical and revealing?

Do they deepen our emotional investment?

Do they create momentum of their own?

Or does the audience begin impatiently waiting for us to get back to the present-day story?

That is something I want to watch very carefully.

The same is true of the choreography.

Do the transitions work? The musical pacing. The comedy. The tone.

Does the integration of the songs and the scenes work well?

Does the cumulative experience of watching the entire show – instead of hearing isolated sections in a development room – payoff at the end?

A workshop production exposes the architecture, especially for new musicals.

 

Development Is Not About Protecting the Show

There is a temptation for writers in development to keep refining.

One more draft.

One more reading.

One more conversation.

One more rewrite before anyone really sees it.

There is safety in that.

But eventually, development has to become exposure.

You have to let the work encounter actors moving through space, music filling a room. transitions happening in real time.

Design elements beginning to appear.

And an audience responding — or not responding — where you thought they would.

That is where your musical will start telling you things you did not know about it.

That’s when the work gets real.

And, after three years of development, that is what I know LITTLE THINGS needs now.

Not another theoretical conversation about whether the show works, or where to tweak this moment or that line.

It needs to be experienced on stage.

Why Philadelphia?

Philadelphia also happens to be exactly the right place for this stage of the journey.

David is a Philadelphia native, and the city is very much part of the musical’s personality.

There is even a cameo appearance from Gritty, the wonderfully unhinged Philadelphia Flyers mascot — which tells you something about the tone we’ve been trying to build.

After developing the show in New York, bringing it into David’s hometown gives us a different kind of audience and a different kind of room.

That matters.

Development is not only about improving a script.

It is also about discovering who the work is for and how people experience it.

This Is Why I Believe in Development

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about why any of us continue to do theater.

It is an unreasonable profession in so many ways. Especially right now.

It asks for enormous amounts of time, energy, money, patience, and faith. Faith in the writer, in the director, and in the audience to resonate with the material you’re trying out.

There are very few guarantees.

But I keep doing it because I believe theater matters.

I believe stories placed onstage can enter (and even change) the cultural conversations.

I believe they can help us understand people whose lives are different from our own.

I believe they can create recognition.

Empathy.

Argument.

Catharsis.

Joy.

And occasionally, a different way of seeing the world.

That is also why I care so deeply about development.

If we believe stories can matter once they reach an audience, then we have to care about how those stories get there.

We have to give writers enough room to discover what their work is actually trying to become.

We have to ask what experience we want the audience to have.

And eventually, we have to stop protecting the work and put it in front of people.

That is where LITTLE THINGS is now.

Three years into the journey, we are ready to find out what the musical teaches us when it finally gets up on its feet.

Because development is not about keeping a show in development.

It is about preparing the work to meet the world.

 

Come join us at the Philadelphia Theater Company for LITTLE THINGS on September 29th at 3pm

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.

Readings Aren’t the Goal. Development is.

Readings Aren’t the Goal. Development is.

Readings Aren’t the Goal. Production Is.

Why so many playwrights get stuck in the development loop—and how to avoid it.

By Cate Cammarata

If you’re writing a new play or musical, at some point you’re going to need to put it in front of an audience.

There is simply no substitute for hearing actors speak your words out loud, seeing where an audience leans in, where they laugh, where they become restless, and where they become emotionally invested.

We need to bring an audience in to learn how the work is landing. That’s why we do readings.

Theaters and producers also need to hear information a script before they invest all the time, money, and resources required to move the script to a full production.

Readings are one of the most useful, economical and practical tools we have in the development process.

I am very much for readings.

But I think our industry has developed a problem.

Too many writers have grown to believe that development itself is the destination.

But it’s not.

Too many projects spend years moving from reading to reading, workshop to workshop, feedback session to feedback session—without ever reaching a production.

And that was never the purpose.

 

A Reading Is a Diagnostic Tool

Think of a reading the way a doctor thinks about an X-ray.

The X-ray isn’t the treatment.

It’s information.

The reading is not the final product.

It’s a way to discover:

  • What is working

  • What is confusing

  • What is emotionally landing

  • Where the pace drags.

  • What questions the audience is left asking it’s done.

The goal is not to accumulate readings.

The goal is to gather information on what should be addressed and revised in order to move the piece forward.

But if a project has had five readings and nothing significant is being changed – the work needs to find a way to a full production.

So then, is the work ready? It depends. What does the feedback actually say?

 

Not All Feedback Is Equal

One of the most important lessons I teach playwrights and musical theatre writers is this:

Always pay attention to who is giving the feedback.

Many writers collect comments from everyone in the room and treat every opinion as equally valuable.

Watch out; that could be dangerous.

Consider:

  • Is the feedback coming from a producer?

  • A literary manager?

  • A dramaturg?

  • A director?

  • An actor?

  • A regular audience member?

Each person is experiencing the work through a different lens:

  • A literary manager may identify issues that affect programming decisions.

  • A ldirector may focus on theatrical execution.

  • An actor may notice problems with character motivation.

An audience member may only know that something “felt off.”

All of those perspectives have value.

But they do not necessarily carry equal weight depending on your goals.

The key is to understand the source before deciding what to do with the information.

 

Listen for Patterns

One isolated comment is just one person’s opinion.

Ten versions of the same comment are data.

One person might say:

“Act Two felt slow.”

Another would admit:

“I lost focus after intermission.”

Someone trying to be helpful would share:

“I wasn’t sure what the protagonist wanted anymore.”

Or add:

“The ending felt farther away than I expected.”

Different words – but the same underlying issue.

When multiple people are pointing toward the same problem—even if they’re describing it differently—the audience is intuiting something important.

That doesn’t automatically mean they know how to fix it (although they may try to rewrite your play on the spot to “help”).

But it usually means they’re correctly identifying a symptom.

Your job is to investigate the cause.

 

The Audience Is Usually Right About Problems

And usually wrong about solutions.

Remember that.

An audience member may accurately identify confusion around a character’s motivation – and then they may propose a scene, a speech, or an entirely new subplot to fix it.

Now, the confusion is valuable information.

Their proposed solution? Not so much.

As the writer, your responsibility is to diagnose the underlying issue and solve it in a way that serves the piece.

 

Trust Your Instincts

No matter how experienced the person giving notes may be, never make a change simply because someone told you to. No matter how famous.

Every revision should pass through your own artistic judgment.

Ask yourself:

  • Does this note resonate to me?

  • Does it reveal a real problem?

  • Does it align with my vision for the piece?

  • Will it make the play stronger?

If the answer is no, don’t make the change.

The work belongs to you. The final decisions belong to you.

A professional writer learns how to listen productively without becoming obsessed by other people’s opinions.

Process every comment through your own filter: your own gut reaction to it.

 

Remember: It’s Your Intellectual Property

This is especially important when production opportunities enter the picture.

Sometimes a theatre, director, producer, or literary manager may request changes before agreeing to produce a script.

Those requests may be reasonable.

They may even lead to improvements.

Or – they may not.

Writers often feel trapped in these situations because production opportunities can be difficult to secure.

Unfortunatlely, I’ve seen it happen too many times.

Here’s what I remind my clients:

The work is your intellectual property.

If you choose to make adjustments to facilitate a production, that is your decision.

But the script remains yours.

You are not permanently surrendering authorship.

After the production ends, you are free to decide which – if any – of those changes belong in future drafts.

The work is yours..

The key is making intentional choices for now instead of feeling pressured into introducing permanent changes into your script. 

 

We Need Better Development Models

The larger issue is that our field often relies too heavily on readings as the primary development mechanism.

Readings are valuable.

They’re essential.

But they’re not enough.

Theatre is a production-based art form.

Certain discoveries only emerge when a piece is staged, designed, rehearsed, and performed in front of a paying audience over time.

The challenge, of course, is cost.

Productions require resources.

Readings are comparatively inexpensive, which is why many promising projects remain trapped in “developmental hell.”

As an industry, we need more innovative, practical, and sustainable ways to move readings into productions.

We need models that allow artists to test work in front of audiences in spaces that don’t require enormous budgets.

We need pathways that help writers move beyond endless feedback cycles and toward actual production experiences.

Those questions—and the future of developing theatre—are topics I explore regularly in my Creative Producer emails each Friday.

Because the goal isn’t another reading.

The goal is helping great plays and musicals find their way to the stage.


About CreateTheater

At CreateTheater, we help playwrights and musical theatre writers develop producible work—not just polished scripts. Through dramaturgy, development labs, strategic feedback, and production-focused guidance, we help writers move from draft to audience to production with intention.

Development is a step. Production is the destination.

Want more practical strategies for moving plays and musicals from development to production?

Every Friday, I share my Creative Producer newsletter with playwrights, musical theater writers, directors, and independent producers exploring new models for developing and producing work.

Join the list and receive weekly insights on script development, audience-building, production strategy, and creating sustainable pathways to the stage.

Why Most Theater Projects Stall

Why Most Theater Projects Stall

 

Why Most Theater Projects Stall

 

Most theater projects do not stall because the work isn’t good.

They stall because development is so difficult to sustain.

A playwright begins with excitement.
A composer starts hearing the score.
A collaborative team gathers around an idea that feels urgent and alive.

Then, slowly, the momentum fades.

The reading happens.
Feedback comes in.
People say encouraging things.

And then…

Nothing.

No next step.
No developmental strategy.
No producing support.
No sustained artistic ecosystem to mentor the work forward.

The project enters the place where many promising theater works disappear:
developmental limbo.

 

The Isolation Problem

Many writers spend years developing work in isolation.

Not because they want to — but because the structure of the contemporary theater industry often leaves them there.

Theater is inherently collaborative, but development has increasingly become private.

Writers revise alone.
Submit alone.
Network alone.
Attempt to produce alone.

Without sustained collaboration, it becomes difficult to maintain clarity about the work itself.

Questions begin to accumulate:

  • Is this working?
  • What audience is this really for?
  • What changes should I make?
  • Is the problem structural or is it something else?
  • Is this project producible?
  • Should I keep going with this project?

Without artistic guidance, revisions can become circular rather than forward-moving.

Many writers are not actually revising the script anymore.
They are revising to please someone else.

 

Feedback Is Not the Same Thing as Development

One of the biggest misconceptions in new work creation is the idea that feedback alone = development.

But receiving opinions is not the same thing as building a show.

A playwright may receive:

  • script notes
  • workshop responses
  • reactions from peers
  • coverage
  • dramaturgical comments

But unless someone is helping shape a long-term developmental process, the work can still stall.

Real development requires:

  • continuity
  • momentum
  • leadership
  • collaboration
  • producing awareness
  • audience understanding
  • artistic accountability

In other words:
development is not just about rewriting pages.

It is about sustaining movement.

 

Momentum Is the Most Important Resource

The greatest threat to new theatrical work is not failure.

It is inertia.

A project loses momentum when:

  • there are no deadlines
  • no collaborators
  • no producing pathway
  • no developmental milestones
  • no audience engagement
  • no ecosystem carrying the work forward

And momentum matters because theater is not created with just one one step.

The strongest projects evolve through sustained interaction between:

  • writers
  • directors
  • dramaturgs
  • performers
  • producers
  • audiences

Without movement, even strong projects begin to psychologically disappear for the artists creating them.

Theater history is filled with extraordinary unfinished, unproduced, or abandoned work — not because the stories lacked value, but because development requires infrastructure.

And infrastructure is expen$ive.

 

The Economics of Development

There are more good stories than the theater industry currently has the capacity to produce.

That is the reality every developmental company confronts.

The cost of producing theater right now – anywhere – is extraordinarily high.
Institutional risk is real.
Commercial production requires enormous capital.
Nonprofit theaters operate with limited resources and shrinking margins.

Which means many worthy projects never receive any sustained developmental investment.

This is why artistic support matters so deeply.

Not every project will receive a full production immediately.

But every artist deserves:

  • serious development
  • collaboration
  • momentum
  • community
  • producing literacy
  • audience connection
  • a pathway forward

 

What Development Could Be

At its best, theatrical development is not simply script improvement.

It is the creation of conditions where artists and projects can continue evolving toward audiences.

That requires more than workshops.

It requires sustained ecosystems supporting new theatre.

Spaces where:

  • writers build long-term relationships
  • producers engage early
  • dramaturgy provides strategy
  • projects are developed sustainably
  • momentum is protected
  • artists are not isolated

This is our philosophy behind CreateTheater’s development programs.

We believe new work deserves:

  • sustained artistic support
  • collaborative infrastructure
  • dramaturgical guidance
  • producing insight
  • and meaningful pathways toward presentation

Because while not every project can immediately move to full production, every serious artist deserves the opportunity to continue growing their work in community.

 

Developing the Work in Community

Theater does not move forward in isolation, alone.

It moves forward through sustained development, collaboration, and momentum.

At CreateTheater we’re working toward helping develop the work and then, when it’s ready, creating the pathways forward. Collaboratively.

At CreateTheater, we believe development should lead somewhere.

Our flagship programs are built around long-term artistic growth, dramaturgical support, and industry presentations & productions.

This month, we’re launching:

The 12-Month Musical Writing Lab

The 12-Month NYC Producer Lab

The Off-Broadway Producer Intensive

If you’re ready to move your project forward, make sure you sign up before the end of June.

Stay in the loop with our upcoming workshops!
If Your Play Isn’t Moving Forward, Read This

If Your Play Isn’t Moving Forward, Read This

If Your Play Isn’t Moving Forward, Read This

There’s a moment almost every playwright hits.

You’ve revised the script.
You’ve gotten feedback.
Maybe you’ve even done a reading.

And then…

Nothing.

No momentum.
No next step.
No production.
No real traction.

So you start wondering if the problem is the industry.
Or the timing.
Or whether theater is just impossible right now.

But after years working with new plays and musicals in New York, I can tell you something difficult — and liberating:

Most scripts don’t stall because the writer isn’t talented.

They stall because the work isn’t yet producible.

And those are two very different things.

A lot of writers are creating plays as literary documents.

But theater isn’t literature.

Theater is a live event that requires:
actors,
directors,
designers,
producers,
money,
space,
audience buy-in,
and a reason to exist right now.

That doesn’t mean your work has to be commercial.
It doesn’t mean it has to be safe.
And it definitely doesn’t mean you should write to trends.

But it does mean your script has to understand the realities of production.

Can a director envision this onstage?
Can actors emotionally land inside it?
Can an audience track the dramatic engine?
Does the structure create momentum?
Does the play know what experience it’s trying to create in the room?

These are producing questions.
And they are creative questions.

I think this is the missing conversation in a lot of playwright education.

Writers are taught how to write scenes.
But not how to build theatrical experiences people want to champion.

And honestly?
That’s where careers begin to shift.

Because once your work becomes producible, people can suddenly move with it.

Producers lean in.
Directors see possibilities.
Collaborators want to attach themselves.
Readings lead to workshops.
Workshops lead to productions.

Momentum becomes easier because the work itself generates momentum.

This week, I’m teaching a free webinar called Write a Producible Play because I think too many talented writers are stuck in development limbo without understanding why.

We’re going to talk about:

  • why some plays move forward while others stall
  • the structural mistakes that quietly kill momentum
  • how producers evaluate new work
  • and how to develop your script with production in mind without sacrificing your artistic voice

Because your play does not need to become smaller.

It needs to become stage-ready.

And those are not the same thing.

If your work has felt stuck lately, this webinar is for you.

Let’s get your play moving again.

If this opened your eyes to how producers actually evaluate your script…

Then you’ll want to be in the room for our live training:

Write a Producible Play Webinar on May 30th

 Off-Broadway Producer Patrick Blake and I will walk you through exactly how to check your work so it’s not just compelling, but something a producer can get on board with.

Stay in the loop with our upcoming workshops!