Just as I find myself slipping back into my recurring mood to voraciously read plays (All My Sons has that effect), I find Patricia Cohen's article on how the contemporary playwright's experience is, um, played out.
The catalyst is Emily Glassberg Sands' yearlong research into bias in the playwriting world.
Ms. Sands sent identical scripts to artistic directors and literary managers around the country. The only difference was that half named a man as the writer (for example, Michael Walker), while half named a woman (i.e., Mary Walker). It turned out that Mary’s scripts received significantly worse ratings in terms of quality, economic prospects and audience response than Michael’s. The biggest surprise? “These results are driven exclusively by the responses of female artistic directors and literary managers,” Ms. Sands said. Amid the gasps from the audience, an incredulous voice called out, “Say that again?”
The other angles Sands takes in this study are fascinating. She shows that male playwrights are turning out many more scripts than their female counterparts, giving credence to the position of directors who defend the uneven breakdown of the shows they produce. At the same time, Sands asks if "scripts by women have to be better than those by men" in order to be produced on Broadway, just as baseball players with dark skin once had to deliver higher batting averages than white players as a baseline in order to make it to the major leagues. Sands also investigates the likelihood of plays with female protagonists to be produced, regardless of the gender of the writer behind them.
Cohen breaks down the uneasy results, a must-read for theater lovers, while Sands' PowerPoint on "Opening the Curtain on Playwright Gender" is fully available via Off-Stage Right.
Meanwhile, I'm missing Wendy Wasserstein more than ever.
Via The Literary Saloon.
Comments