THE TECHNICAL DIRECTOR: THE HISTORY, THE LEGACY, AND A GLIMPSE BEHIND THE CURTAIN A THESIS IN Theatre Presented to the Faculty of the University of Missouri-Kansas City in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree MASTER OF ARTS by AARON DOUGLAS ROOSE B.A., Concordia University St. Paul, 2003 M.F.A., University of Missouri Kansas City, 2013 Kansas City, Missouri 2013 © 2013 AARON DOUGLAS ROOSE ALL RIGHTS RESERVED THE TECHNICAL DIRECTOR: THE HISTORY, THE LEGACY, AND A GLIMPSE BEHIND THE CURTAIN Aaron Douglas Roose, Candidate for the Master of Arts Degree University of Missouri-Kansas City, 2013 ABSTRACT The central purpose of this thesis is to explore and document the position of the technical director within the American theatre during the 20th century and into the present day. The research focuses more heavily on the earliest origins found in the existing literature and subsequently traces the position into more recent years and the manifestations of the job therein. The thesis also endeavors to lay a framework for bridging the origins of the job to its current incarnations. To this end, a significant amount of new research is contributed to the field of theatre history. To the author’s knowledge, no such work previously existed in the historical canon of theatre literature prior to this thesis. Much of the information contained herein was assimilated from various technical manuals written throughout the 20th century. These manuals were not written to be historical source material, but were concerned with the pragmatic details of technical theatre. Much had to be ascertained by reading between the lines. The research is not merely concerned with numbers or statistical data, but also with what type of individuals are drawn to this position and how they got there. To this end iii personal interviews were utilized and incorporated as a significant part of this project. The information gleaned from the interviews offers a clear picture of who is currently performing this job, the career trajectory those individuals followed to arrive at their current positions, and presents unique insights into what draws people into this type of work and holds their interest throughout a career. The findings show that the role evolved significantly regarding aspects such as specific job functions within certain types of producing organizations. Other aspects such as attention to detail, organization, decision-making, and proficiency in a range of skills have existed virtually unchanged since the advent of the position, when it was often not acknowledged as a separate and specific role in the theatre. In light of ever-increasing technological demands the findings also demonstrate that, gradually, the position of technical director is being more widely recognized as critical and integral to the theatre as an industry. iv APPROVAL PAGE The faculty listed below, appointed by the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences of the University of Missouri-Kansas City, have examined a thesis titled “The Technical Director: The History, The Legacy, and a Glimpse Behind the Curtain,” presented by Aaron Douglas Roose, candidate for the Master of Arts degree, and certify that in their opinion it is worthy of acceptance. Supervisory Committee Felicia H. Londré, Ph.D., Committee Chair Department of Theatre Charles M. Hayes, M.F.A Department of Theatre Jeff Church Producing Artistic Director Coterie Theatre, Kansas City, Missouri v CONTENTS ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... iii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS ............................................................................................ vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................. viii PREFACE .......................................................................................................................... ix INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ xiii Chapter I. What Does the Technical Director Do? ................................................................. 1 II. Interviews – Who is the Technical Director? ...................................................... 14 III. History – Part 1 .................................................................................................... 44 IV. History – Part 2 .................................................................................................... 53 V. History – Part 3 .................................................................................................... 66 VI. History – Part 4 .................................................................................................... 80 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................... 104 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................................................................................... 110 VITA ............................................................................................................................... 117 vi ILLUSTRATIONS Figures Page A – 1st Page of Edward Siedle’s 1908 Contract with the ............................................ 48 Metropolitan Opera Company B – Richard Rychtarik’s 1947 Contract with the ....................................................... 52 Metropolitan Opera Company C – Organizational Chart from The Scene Technician’s ............................................. 56 Handbook (1928) D – Table of Contents – Stage Scenery and Lighting: ............................................... 63 A Handbook for Non-professionals (1930) E – Organizational Chart for a Little Theatre – from ................................................. 68 The Practical Theatre (1926) F – Two Different Organizational Charts – from ....................................................... 71 The Process of Play Production (1926) G – Organizational Chart – Children’s Theatre of ..................................................... 74 Evanston – from Creative Dramatics (1930) H - A detailed chart showing various positions in ..................................................... 85 different types of producing organizations, including technical director (Burris-Meyer, 1938, 28-29). K – Working Drawings – Burris-Meyer (1971, 62-63) ............................................... 88 L – Designer Drawing – Burris-Meyer (1971, 61-62) ................................................ 89 vii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis would not have been possible without the help and support of many individuals. To the individuals who responded to my interview requests and gave of their time and imparted their collective experience, my thanks. They are: Aaron Wilson, Adam Goodrum, Bill Shinoski, Bob Scales, Ben Sammler, Chaz Bell, Chuck Hayes, Dennis Dorn, Doug Taylor, EJ Reinagel, Henry Tharpe, Jack Nardi, Jeff Roudabush, Jerry Genochio, Le Hook, Mark Hennigs, Matt Francis, and Nathaniel Wiessner. Ben Sammler was particularly helpful, both in directing me to other potential interview candidates and also providing background information on Yale’s theatre program and the recent history of incorporating structural design into graduate coursework. I would like to thank The Metropolitan Opera, and specifically John Tomasicchio, their archivist, both for their assistance in retrieving invaluable source material and for permission to reprint materials from over 100 years ago. A significant amount of networking and research resulted directly from the United States Institute for Theatre Technology Conference in 2012, and I would like to thank the USITT for bringing together past and future generations of theatre practitioners. The organization provides unique opportunities, particularly for students. Neil Mazzella willingly gave of his time and energy and ultimately provided insight into part of the theatrical industry that I was unaware would have direct impact on this research, but made an excellent addition to this paper. My thanks to Jeff Church for his time and effort invested by being on my committee. I offer special thanks to Chuck Hayes for his guidance and assistance in completing my M.F.A, his subsequent help on this project (including sitting on my committee), during which time he has also provided significant employment assistance, for which my family viii also thanks him. This paper would not exist without my decision to pursue the M.A. degree. That decision would not and could not have happened without the assistance and incredible motivation given by Dr. Felicia Londré; for her editorial assistance, her tenacious encouragement, for chairing my committee, and for her patience throughout this process, much gratitude is owed to her. Finally, my wife Laura is the main reason I made it through graduate school, including this project. For her there simply aren’t words, or the space to write them, but I am grateful. ix PREFACE During my first semester of graduate school, while taking an American theatre history class, I attempted to write a term paper regarding the history of the technical director. At that time I was pursuing only the M.F.A. and was, as yet, unaware of the magnitude of the question being considered. I quickly discovered that there was virtually no research in this particular area of theatre history; and that pragmatically the writing project was far more complex than a simple research paper could address. After deciding