The Harvard Theatre

The report of the Committee on the Visual Arts, headed by art collector John Nicholas Brown, brought to light many problems which face the Fine Arts Department, the School of Design and the Harvard museums. But of all their observations, those concerning Harvard theatre are among the most important. One glance at the advertisements for no less than four student productions--each involving at least thirty undergraduates--will tell why.

Recognizing the desire of actors and technicians for experience and of playgoers for entertainment, the Committee wisely recommended "that a theatre program be inaugurated at Harvard and that it be housed in the proposed theatre." Although the number of current student productions is unprecedented, there is no reason to believe the present upsurge temporary. Each successive year produces a Freshman class with more dramatic interest and talent than the preceding one. Student shows, as a result, have increased both in quantity and in quality. The only major restrictions facing the theatrical groups are adequate facilities, which the house dining halls, abounding with inconveniences, obviously lack. Sanders Theatre cannot house shows demanding curtains, backdrops, or a proscenium arch, not to mention dressing rooms or lighting.

If drama at Harvard is to progress, it should have the benefits of a modern stage with proper facilities for lighting, staging, music accoustics, rehearsals, dressing rooms, and seating. Although present facilities suffice for Elizabethan or "off-Broadway" types of productions, they cannot accomodate most musicals and modern dramas. The Lowell House Players, for example, have been forced to obtain the talents of a construction agency to hold up their arch and scenery.

While most directors agree that a new theatre would improve the quality of drama, there are many who believe it would have the unfortunate effect of reducing the number of productions. More unified control of Harvard drama, they maintain, would limit the number of productions. The attraction of the new theatre might also tempt talent and audiences away from the house groups.

But there is no reason to believe that competition will destroy the recent success of the house productions. As long as there are audiences willing to pay and talent wanting to be used, there is room for another play. The new theatre's appeal, based upon increased polish, should complement the intimacy of house productions. Such competition should only encourage such organizations as HDC to attempt larger, more professional productions and help the house groups to remain, and in some cases to regain, their house flavor.

The Committee's recommendations for the theatre proper should not dampen the spontaneity of student productions. But its recommendations for a faculty "Director of the Theatre" suggest College control, or at least domination, of a field whose main virtue has been its independant enthusiasm. There is no doubt that a Professor of considerable rank and popularity will be needed to arrange program schedules and to assign priorities. There are serious doubts, however, about the value of the recommendation that, "He should be responsible for policy and should administer and schedule the program of the theatre." Student directors have serious and, perhaps, well-founded fears that the faculty Director will use his authority to presecribe the shows to be given and the techniques involved. Not once does the Committee suggest student control, even in a limited capacity.

If the notion of close faculty supervision is distasteful to undergraduate theatre leaders, the recommendation that the faculty Director "might assume direction of a certain number of undergraduate productions" would be intolerable. Faculty members are consulted or invited to aid in directing plays at present, aware that it is their job to stimulate or even to guide, but not to control. That a faculty member will be needed as an advisor there is no doubt. His authority, however, except for scheduling, should stem from respect and not from regulation.

The success of the theatre at Harvard rests in the realizeation by faculty and by student that the goal is not professional drama, but the development of undergraduate talent--the theatre should not be an end in itself.