When the Producer Leaves the Rehearsal Room

When the Producer Leaves the Rehearsal Room

I have spent much of my career in an unusual place in the development of new work: somewhere between dramaturg, creative producer, and head of creative development.

I often come into a project long before production, and stay with it for years. I know the earlier drafts. I know why scenes changed, why characters evolved, and what questions the writer has been trying to answer along the way.

That continuity matters because theatre may be the most collaborative of all art forms.

Once a play moves into production, the director, actors, and designers begin contributing something the script cannot provide on its own: theatrical language.

The director becomes the interpreter of the play. Actors bring their own views about their character’s behavior, objectives, and emotional life. Designers bring the theatrical elements of space, sound, light, costume, music, and atmosphere into the mix.

The script is no longer the only storytelling tool.

And that is partly what makes theatre so exciting.

But – every collaborator also brings their own interpretation of the play.

And that is where my job changes.

During development, I may be asking:

  • Does the scene work?
  • Is the character’s intention clear?
  • Is the structure doing what the writer intends?

In production, I am increasingly asking:

  • Are all of these theatrical choices helping us tell the story the writer intended to tell?

That question has been in front of every choice we’re making in our newest production, The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue.

I have worked with Debbie Goodstein and this play through multiple drafts and stages of development. I know the conversations that created the script we now have, and how each of the previous versions helped us arrive here. I know the story Debbie wants to give to the audience at the end.

My responsibility is not to impose my own interpretation on the production.

It is primarily to protect hers.

Protecting the Writer’s Intention

That responsibility was very apparent earlier this year.

Back in March, I made the difficult decision to replace the director and the design team then attached to the production.

The issue was not that the director lacked ideas. Quite the opposite.

The interpretation was beginning to move the play toward a much more overtly political frame than the one Debbie had actually written.

That distinction matters.

A director has to interpret a text. But interpretation should reveal the play the writer wrote —not replace it with the director’s own version.

I became increasingly concerned that the play was beginning to tell a different story from the one Debbie intended.

So – I made the difficult decision to change direction.

It was expensive.

It cost the production time and money.

And it would have been much easier in the moment to continue rather than to start all over again.

But allowing the wrong central interpretation to take hold would have been far more expensive artistically.

Once a production begins building around a mistaken premise, every other choice follows it: design, performance, tone, marketing, audience expectation.

Sometimes protecting a new play means being willing to stop that process before it goes further.

In the end, I know it was the right call.

The Director Must Still Direct

Protecting the writer’s intention does not mean limiting the director.

The director must bring a theatrical point of view to the work.

That is the job.

  • How does the space tell the story?
  • Where does the audience look – and when?
  • What can sound, movement, light, or music communicate that the words cannot?
  • How do we make “theater magic” happen – within budget?

These are production questions.

When a new work stops asking script questions, it may be ready to move forward.

 

Are the remaining questions production questions?

If we are still wrestling with fundamental questions of story, structure, character, or intention, the work may still need development.

When the questions increasingly concern staging, design, performance, rhythm, and audience experience, then theatrical collaborators need to take over.

But all of those contributions still need a center.

With The Blue Violinist, that center is Debbie’s intention – why she wrote the play.

Not the director’s version of the story.

Not the actors’ version.

Not the designers’ version.

And certainly not mine.

Debbie’s.

From Dramaturgy to Creative Producing

This is where my dramaturgical experience still informs my work as a creative producer.

A dramaturg helps protect and clarify the writer’s intention during development.

For me, producing carries that responsibility into production.

The question changes from:

Is the script expressing the writer’s intention?

to:

Is the production expressing the writer’s intention?

Lighting, sound, performance, and design each contribute to telling the story.

Even marketing begins telling the audience what kind of story they are coming to see.

Someone has to keep looking at the whole, protecting the integrity of the story, and what the audience should be understanding at the end.

Someone with the continuity of knowledge about the project, through each stage of development, helping to shape the final draft an audience will see on stage.

That person must be me.

Sometimes That Requires Me Leaving the Rehearsal Room

Last week, I was in rehearsal every day while we worked at the table.

This week, I am stepping in more selectively.

That is intentional.

The director needs to direct. The actors need space to discover. The production no longer needs the person who remembers every previous draft explaining how we got here.

And I have another job now, with new questions.

  • Is the production moving along as planned?
  • Are the departments communicating?
  • Is the budget holding?
  • Is the marketing telling the right story?
  • Are potential audience members finding us?
  • Are we reaching the industry people we need to reach?
  • What happens after opening?
  • What’s going to be the next step?

Those are producing questions.

Leaving the Rehearsal Room, Not Leaving the Artistic Team

I’m still in daily communication with the writer and the director.

But at this stage my responsibility has widened.

Earlier, I helped the writer create the script.

Now, I help the production remain aligned with the story she set out to tell.

Earlier, I asked whether the script was working.

Now, I ask whether all of the theatrical elements are working together.

And sometimes that means being in rehearsal. Sometimes it means being in a marketing meeting. Sometimes it means asking a difficult question. Sometimes it means making an expensive decision because the artistic direction is taking us away from the play.

And sometimes it means leaving the rehearsal room and trusting the collaborators we have chosen to do their jobs.

Because that, too, is part of making theatre: knowing when to hold the larger vision, when to speak, when to listen, and when to trust the artists around you.

Especially now, when making professional theatre is difficult, expensive, and increasingly fragile, I never want to lose sight of what a privilege it is to be doing this work at all.

To sit in a room with writers, directors, actors, designers, stage managers, and producers and build something – together.

To take a story that once existed only in a writer’s imagination and help it become something an audience can experience together in the dark.

That is why I do this.

And I am deeply honored to be on this journey with Debbie Goodstein and the extraordinary team bringing The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue to New York audiences this fall.

There are easier ways to make a living.

But there are very few things I would rather spend my life doing than helping important stories find their way to the stage.

Come along as The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue moves into its next room—rehearsal, production, and the Off-Broadway stage.

Not sure what your project needs next?

Subscribe to The Producers Room for weekly insights and guidance on how to move new work forward today.

How Do You Know When a New Play Is Ready for Production?

How Do You Know When a New Play Is Ready for Production?

At some point in the development of a new play, you have to stop asking what the script still needs on the page and start asking a different question: Does the play work?

By that I mean: can an audience follow the story, understand what the writer is trying to communicate, stay engaged, and arrive at the end having received what the play intended to give them?

Do they get it? Are they “picking up” what you’re “putting down?”

If the answer is yes, then the next questions may no longer be writing questions.

They may be theatrical ones.

What happens when actors fully inhabit these characters? What does movement add? What does the physical world of the play need to look and feel like? How do scenery, costumes, lighting, sound, music, choreography, rhythm, and silence deepen what is already on the page?

This is where the “fun stuff” enters—but it is more than decoration. These elements become part of the storytelling.

And some discoveries simply cannot be made in another reading.

They can only be made once the play is on its feet.

That threshold is not always obvious. Writers can spend years revising a script and presenting it in reading after reading. A project can become increasingly polished without necessarily becoming more ready.

So how do I know when a new play is ready to move forward?

I ask one question:

Are the remaining questions production questions?

If the fundamental story, character, structure, intention, and meaning are communicating clearly—and the questions you still need answered require actors, staging, design, movement, and an audience—then the project may have reached the point where development needs to become production.

That distinction has become one of the clearest ways I know to determine what kind of room a project needs next.

Development Questions and Production Questions Are Different

When a play is still in development, the questions tend to be foundational.

What does this character want?

Why does this scene exist?

Is the structure working?

Do we understand the relationships?

Is the central conflict clear?

Does the ending grow out of everything that came before it?

What is the play actually about?

Those are writing questions.

They can often be explored through rewrites, table reads, developmental readings, conversations with actors, and focused workshops.

But eventually, if the work is to move forward, the nature of the questions begin to change.

Now you may be asking:

How should this moment be staged?

Where does the audience need visual information?

What does the actor discover by actually moving through the scene?

How long does that transition take?

What does the costume tell us before the character speaks?

How does lighting shape the emotional turn?

What happens to the rhythm once actors are standing, moving, interrupting, crossing, reacting, and sharing space?

Those are no longer primarily writing questions.

They are theatrical questions.

And theatrical questions often require a theatrical room.

A Reading Will Not Answer Every Question

Readings are enormously useful.

I believe in them. I produce them. I have spent years using readings to help writers hear what they have actually written rather than what they think they have written.

But readings have limits.

A table read can tell you whether a scene tracks.

It may not tell you whether the scene works once two actors have to cross the room, handle a prop, change costumes, negotiate silence, or play a physical relationship.

A reading can reveal pacing problems.

It may not tell you whether the pacing problem is actually in the writing—or whether it disappears once the director, actors, movement, sound, and design begin doing their share of the storytelling.

At some point, another reading may simply give you another version of information you already have.

That is when I start asking if the project needs a different room.

Production Readiness Does Not Mean the Script Is Finished

This is important.

Moving into production does not mean that nobody changes another word.

Are you kidding?

New plays continue to evolve in rehearsal.

  • Actors reveal things.
  • Design reveals things.
  • Staging reveals things.
  • Transitions reveal things.

Sometimes a practical production problem exposes a writing problem you could not see before.

That does not mean the play was not ready.

It means theater is collaborative.

The playwright is no longer carrying the entire storytelling burden alone.

The director begins interpreting the work through space and behavior.

Actors begin communicating relationships that may never need to be explained explicitly on the page.

Costumes tell us who someone is.

Scenery establishes world and circumstance.

Lighting controls focus.

Sound creates emotional and environmental information.

All of those collaborators now carry part of the story.

That changes what the script itself has to do.

The Questions Tell You What Room You Need

One of the mistakes I see in new-work development is deciding on the format first.

“We should do a reading.”

“We should do a workshop.”

“We should produce a showcase.”

“We’re ready for production.”

But the better question is:

What do we still need to learn?

If we still need to understand the story, structure, character, or intention, then the project probably needs more development.

If we need to understand how actors embody the relationships, how movement affects rhythm, how the physical world supports the story, or how an audience experiences the piece in space, then another table read may no longer be enough.

The next room should be the room capable of answering the next question.

Sometimes that room is a writing room.

Sometimes it is a table read.

Sometimes it is a workshop.

And sometimes the next room is the rehearsal room.

The Threshold

There is no single checklist that makes a play “production ready.”

But there is a shift I listen for.

The questions stop sounding like:

What is this play?

And increasingly begin sounding like:

How can a musical motif carry this idea? What happens if one character looks to another, then out to the audience, to end the scene? What can the lighting tell us without anyone saying a word? How can we make this dream sequence more theatrical?

That is a meaningful threshold.

It does not mean the script is perfect. It means the questions that remain may no longer be solvable through another rewrite or another table read.

The next discoveries may require actors, space, movement, design, sound, light—and eventually, an audience.

So before deciding whether the next step is another reading, a workshop, a showcase, or a production, ask yourself what you still need to learn.

Are you still trying to clarify story, structure, character, or intention?

Or are you beginning to ask how the nonverbal elements of theater can deepen the storytelling—how performance, staging, sound, design, movement, and visual imagery can communicate what the words alone cannot?

That is the distinction I pay attention to.

Are the remaining questions still development questions?

Or have they become production questions?

Because sometimes the clearest sign that a new play is ready to move forward is that the answers no longer live entirely on the page.

And Now, the Next Room

The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue has been in development for a long time.

We have worked endlessly on the script. We brought in a cultural consultant to help us deepen the world of the play and sharpen the conflict within it. The writer, the director, and I have gone over words, ideas, scenes, transitions, and drafts again and again—always asking whether the story is communicating clearly and whether the ideas we are planting are paying off by the end.

We have thought carefully about what the violinist means, and how the music itself can carry meaning that does not need to be spoken.

At a certain point, though, you have to recognize when the page has taken you as far as it can.

The questions we are asking now are different.

What happens when these characters are embodied by incredibly experienced actors? What changes when they are standing in the room together? What can a glance communicate? What can music do that dialogue cannot? What will the physical world of the play tell us? Where can design, movement, silence, rhythm, and performance make the story richer than it could ever be on the page alone?

That is where we are now.

On Tuesday, we begin rehearsal.

And this is the part I love: the moment when all of that careful development begins to meet the collaborative magic of theater.

The script is not being abandoned. It is being handed over to a new set of storytellers.

The actors.
The director.
The designers.
The music.
The room itself.

Now we get to discover what they know.

On to the next room.

Come along as The Blue Violinist Over West End Avenue moves into its next room—rehearsal, production, and the Off-Broadway stage.

Not sure what your project needs next?

Subscribe to The Producers Room for weekly insights and guidance on how to move new work forward today.

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?

When Development Becomes Production

When Development Becomes Production

The Pipeline in Motion

I’m writing this from Philadelphia, where I’ll be in rehearsal for a few days with LITTLE THINGS at the Philadelphia Theatre Company.

And looking at the week ahead, I realized that this may be one of the clearest examples I’ve had of what I mean when I talk about a development pipeline.

Because this week, CreateTheater has work happening at nearly every point along it.

On Monday night, we’ll hold another Monday Night Developmental Reading—this time Act One of a new musical by ETC member Jarlath Jacobs, currently living in Italy. The working title is JACQUES & JILL, a reworking of her musical FIRE ISLAND, which had a showcase production at Theatre Row as part of the CreateTheater New Works Festival in 2022.

That project has already been produced once.

And now it is back in development.

Because development is not a straight line, and production is not always the end of the process.

 

Production Is Not the End of Development

There is a tendency to imagine a theater project moving along a neat, linear path:

Write the show → develop the show → produce the show → done.

But that is almost never how new theater actually works.

A reading reveals one thing.
A workshop reveals another.
A showcase reveals something else entirely.

Sometimes a production tells a writer that the piece is finished.

Sometimes it tells them exactly where the next version needs to begin.

That is what development is for.

Our Monday Night Developmental Readings have been running all summer, and we are now booked every Monday through December with readings of new plays and musicals. Some are early drafts. Others have already had significant development or production experience.

The point isn’t that every reading immediately leads to a production.

The point is that the work keeps moving.

 

Tuesday: Back in the Development Room

On Tuesday, after a day in rehearsal in Philadelphia, I’ll run two ETC writing groups which meet over Zoom to continue developing new plays and musicals.

This is quieter work.

There are no costumes. No lighting cues. No ticket buyers.

It can be easy to look at this stage and think that the “real” theater hasn’t begun yet.

But this is where much of the real theater work gets done.

Characters are clarified. Structures are challenged. Songs are moved. Scenes disappear. Endings change. Writers hear pages aloud and discover that something they thought was perfectly clear on the page isn’t clear at all when actors speak it.

Those decisions may eventually determine whether a producer can see a viable production in the work.

Which brings us to Wednesday.

 

Wednesday: Development Becomes Production

On Wednesday, we will officially announce THE BLUE VIOLINIST OVER WEST END AVENUE Off-Broadway.

Tickets will go on sale.

Previews begin October 27.

That is the moment outsiders can see.

The announcement.
The theater.
The dates.
The tickets.

It looks like production has begun.

But from where I’m sitting, production began a year earlier.

It began in the conversations with playwright Debbie Goodstein about what the play wanted to become.

It continued through readings, rewrites, artistic conversations, assembling a producing team, hiring (and firing) collaborators and making the hundreds of decisions required before anyone ever walks into a rehearsal room.

And, importantly, the development still isn’t over.

On Thursday afternoon, Debbie, director Jonathon Silverstein, and I will spend several hours together hearing the newest draft of the play—just the three of us. On Zoom, because it’s summer and we’re not all in Manhattan.

No audience.

No presentation.

No attempt to make it look finished. But the work continues.

We are still listening.

Still asking questions.

Still making sure the script we take into rehearsal at the end off September is the strongest version of the play we know how to make right now.

That is what I think writers sometimes misunderstand about the moment when development turns into production:

You don’t stop developing because you have a production.

The questions simply change.

 

The Questions Change

During early development, we might ask:

Is the story clear?
What does this character want?
Is this scene earning its place?
Where does Act One actually end?

Once production approaches, those questions begin intersecting with others:

How will this world physically exist onstage?
What kind of actor does this role require?
What does the audience need to understand visually?
What can we afford?
What must we protect artistically?
What has to be decided now?

By Friday, we’ll be in another production meeting for The Blue Violinist, approving final designs for the set, lights and costumes. We’re hoping to have casting complete by the beginning of the following week.

Those are unmistakably production decisions.

Yet they are still serving exactly the same thing we were serving in the development room: the story.

And Meanwhile, More Work Is Moving Forward

Thursday evening, we’ll shift gears again and continue to plan the three CreateTheater Showcases we’re producing in 2027.

Friday evening, we’ll turn toward the November New Works Cabaret Festival.

And here in Philadelphia, LITTLE THINGS is entering a different stage of the same journey.

The show has already gone through development with CreateTheater, including a cabaret presentation last year. Now the writers have the opportunity to put more of it on its feet and discover what happens when actors, staging, choreography, music and an audience become part of the equation.

That workshop will give us information we could never find sitting around a table.

And whatever we learn will feed the next stage.

 

So When Does Development Become Production?

I’m not sure there is one clean line.

I think there is a period when the center of gravity shifts.

At first, the primary question is:

What is this show?

Eventually, the question becomes:

How are we going to make this show happen?

And somewhere in between, the producer begins committing resources, collaborators, space, money, time and reputation to the answer.

That is when development starts becoming production.

But development itself never completely disappears.

At least, I don’t think it should.

A healthy new-work pipeline isn’t a conveyor belt that moves a script from one box to the next.

It is a continuing artistic process in which each new stage gives us more information.

Reading → workshop → showcase → production → perhaps development again.

The goal is not simply to “get the show produced.”

The goal is to make the strongest show we can—and to understand what the work needs next.

Looking at the week ahead—readings, writing groups, rehearsal, an Off-Broadway announcement, a script session, design approvals, showcase planning and a cabaret festival—it feels less like a collection of separate activities and more like one continuous act of making new theater.

And that is exactly what I had always hoped CreateTheater would be.

A place where new work keeps moving toward the stage.

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

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 August 29th at 3pm