News

Community Safety Department Director To Resign Amid Tension With Cambridge Police Department

News

From Lab to Startup: Harvard’s Office of Technology Development Paves the Way for Research Commercialization

News

People’s Forum on Graduation Readiness Held After Vote to Eliminate MCAS

News

FAS Closes Barker Center Cafe, Citing Financial Strain

News

8 Takeaways From Harvard’s Task Force Reports

Mystified

THE MAIL

NO WRITER ATTRIBUTED

To the Editor:

I was, by and large, pleased with Katherine Ashton's article on Blaridge's Theatre (What Is To Be Done?, Sept. 18); after all, any publicity is good publicity. Nevertheless, I was mystified by a few assertions she presented as commonplace truths, and somewhat annoyed at her out-of-hand dismissal of the idea of a semi-repertory company, a dismissal based, I think, on flimsy reasoning.

First, Blaridge's Theatre will not be, as Ashton suggests, a coterie of chosen actors to which is added, as the occasion demands, the odd tap-dancer or novelty singer. Auditions for all shows will be completely open; the purpose of the repertory auditions is to establish a pool of known talent on which to draw, a group of actors of proven interest and ability.

Second, Ashton says that "A semi-repertory company is usually weak." This comes as a bit of a surprise; I don't know about Ashton, but until I helped start Blaridge's, I was quite sure such a thing did not exist. It is hard to say, therefore, whether such companies are "usually" weak or strong.

Finally, Ashton claims that "Aeschylus and Sheridan, Feydeau and Joe Orton are ill-assorted companions"; this is nonsense, as anyone familiar with theatrical repertory knows. The ART season will include Shakespeare and Feiffer, Beckett and Beaumarchais; the Blaridge productions are, I think, similarly well-chosen. To follow the course of specialization Ashton suggests would, over the length of a season, bore the actors almost as much as the audience, and destroy the whole purpose for which the company was started.

If I understand Ashton's reasoning correctly, we can neither have a repertory company, nor a semi-rep, nor can we produce individual shows, lest we fall into the pit of unpopularity occupied by the Ex and the Quad Houses. This position is unfair to us, to the Ex and to the house drama societies but, more importantly, it is unfair to Harvard audiences. The Crimson may think there is too much student drama; we at Blaridge's are convinced the best is yet to come. Michael Kaplan

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags