When Nick Keenan and I were in the early stages of redesigning BSTC’s website, we both agreed early on in the process that the new website should be blog-based. There were a number of logistical reasons for this, not the least of which were financial. Like most small theatre companies, we did not have a fortune to invest in the creation of this new website, and in most cases, blogging is pretty affordable.
But the interest in developing a blog-based site went beyond the need to keep our spending in check. During our brainstorming sessions (primarily directed by the always inspiring Mr. Keenan) we decided that we wanted to use our site to not only promote our mission and our seasons, but to engage directly with our growing audiences. We wanted to the new site/blog to be a kind of constant conversation between the artists and the audience that make up our theatre family.
Our seasons are a carefully programmed, thematically linked trio of productions that we hope will spark an open conversation between the artists and the audience. We want our audiences to take part in the conversation; both positive and critical, in the stories that we are, essentially, programming for them. Our stories are are both a challenge and a gift to those who come to see them.
So today, we are thrilled to unveil a extraordinarily simple but vital new feature of our website. We are turning on a new feature that will allow our audiences and our artists to respond to each individual show, right on the show page.
What does this mean?
This means that an audience member will be encouraged go to our website after attending a BSTC production and leave a comment, a question or even a mini-review on the very page that is the central hub for information and news on the show. That means that anyone who buys a ticket to the show through our website (our primary gateway to tickets) will be able to see the user-generated reviews and comments, and the responses left in turn, by the the producing artists: us. Potential ticket-buyers will be able to see the conversation that is already happening around the shows before they buy their tickets. The idea is not without risk: it could surely backfire if we don’t live up to the high artistic standards we set for ourselves. (And we commit ourselves to leaving the negative responses up with the positive.) But the risk is worth it. It is an effort to increase transparency: to localize and popularize the narrative surrounding the experiences that our audiences have when attending our shows. We want our audiences to learn from us, and we want to learn from them. That is the point of any meaningful conversation.
So here we go! From here on out, any show you see at BackStage Theatre Company is open for discussion. Let’s start with Orange Flower Water. Seen it yet?
If so, tell us what you thought. Start the conversation.
Matthew Reeder
Artistic Director.
There were moments I realized I was holding my breath as the tension of the scene escalated. Shelly Nixon and Tony Bozzulo were both superb! I look forward to seeing them both on stage again!
I wrote a paper about this show, and the more I pondered the different aspects of it, the more I liked it! Bozzuto and Kettering played such intense characters beautifully! Nixon and Huysman made an interesting couple, but I found myself relieved that they ended up together. I liked the in the round style, however this aspect made it difficult to see the actors’ faces at times. Other than that, I am extremely pleased with this show and glad that it was my first of many Back Stage productions!
A friend and I were visiting Chicago from other states, and went to see “Orange Flower Water” on the recommendation of friends who had seen it in MA. We were certainly glad we did. (And my friend has seen a few plays; he’s a professor of theater–directing– at the Univ. of Georgia) We were both quite impressed with the production. The actors did a superb job, and being so close to the action, I sometimes had the feeling that I was intruding on a family row. Best of luck to Backstage, and when I visit Chicago again I will see whatever is playing.
True, as my friend Joseph said, the show was impressive. Actually, quite powerful. There was a sustained build to the show that captured and held your attention. So many cross emotions going on. It helped that all four actors were on the stage throughout. The actors demonstrated their abilities well. I look forward to seeing more of their productions when next in Chicago. Oh, yes, the venue was appealing too. You almost felt like you were entering a living room of a house whose owners had strange taste in furniture. The theatre was small but afforded an appropriate intimacy for this particular work. Good Job! Congrats to all concerned.
Thank you for the thoughtful responses! Elizabeth: we love theatre that “grows on you.” We are charged by plays that come alive to an even greater degree as you ponder them on your way home from the theatre. In these moments of “simmering,” the story ceases to become ours and it becomes yours. The director of this play believes that the ending of Orange Flower Water wasn’t really an ending, but a beginning. But of what? The playwright doesn’t tell us . . . exactly. He only drops hints. The nature of this new beginning is left for the audience to create based on what she has learned of the characters and what she understands of human nature in general. In our view, the stories worth telling don’t provide easy answers. Rather, theses stories challenge the audiences with compelling questions that they can take with them back into their world.
Let’s keep talking!
Thanks for your comments, Joseph and Farley! It’s always wonderful to have guests stop in from outside of the Chicago area.
[...] section, where anybody can share their thoughts or reactions. There are some good ones here and here about Orange Flower [...]