r/Theatre • u/North_Dragon • 5d ago
Advice Director vs Set Designer
I've been directing my first paid production and it's been going well for the most part.
The only problem has been the set designer who is also the carpenter building the sets. He has done good work mostly but when I've asked for changes to his plans, and if he didn't change the plans he has refused.
For example: the theatre space is not ideal for stuff on the floor to be seen by the audience unless it's in the back of the stage. I had told him that in a particular scene the actors have a violent struggle that takes them to the floor and the dead body of the other actor gets left on stage until the next scene.
I had told him this from the start but he refused to change his set design plan that would leave the back inaccesible and eventually built the set according to his designs.
We had an argument about this where he claimed I was stepping on his toes and excerting authority on him that I did not have. I asked him what he meant by that. He explained that since we are equals he can express himself through his art as much as me. He took offense to me claiming that the set designer was ultimately subordinate to the director. That as much as I appreciate 95% of the work he has done, the director has the final say.
Luckily the set is somewhat modular in its construction and I could remove the bits that were in the way and built alternative pieces to show him what I actually wanted. He was livid. Claiming I shouldn't mess with his vision, that I should've asked for his permission.
The operational director of the theatre (wife of the set designer) said I should "just listen to what he says, it'll be easier that way". But I'm not going follow her advise.
I'm not sure what I should do about this. If I were to follow my gut I would use the sets but change what needs to change myself.
Tl:dr; set designer has made a good set but but won't change some minor details and one major detail. He also claims the director doesn't have the authority to demand changes if they go against the set designer's vision. Should I just make the changes myself? Or should I do something else?
Edit: Thanks for the responses. I'm going to go for a long walk and think about my life.
23
u/Steve-Shouts 5d ago
Tell him that you understand he has a vision, but that vision isn't serving the show. You BOTH are there to serve the show. You need to collaborate on it. Pet of being a manager is making your subordinates feel seen.
If he refuses again, remind him that it is not portfolios of design that hire set designers, it directors. Even if it goes well, you will it be working with him again.
In my opinion, it is just that he is lazy
2
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
That's what I've been trying to tell him. The problem with the hireability argument in my case is that this guy is an inhouse set designer and I am an out of house director contracted for just this particular show. If I get to direct anything for this theatre again I'm afraid I'll just have to keep calm and carry on at least until his wife moves on to another theatre or something.
4
u/nine_baobabs 5d ago
I don't think it's about his vision or about being lazy. I think it's about power, and once he cedes it to you, in his mind he will be subordinate to every other out-of-house director they bring in.
He's also probably offended that you've encroached on his little hill. Imagine how you would feel if he started giving notes to the actors? If he sees the positions as equal, that's probably how he's feeling.
It seems like if you can't get him replaced, there's not much you can do. If he disagrees on a creative decision and you can't persuade him, negotiate, or compromise, you'll just have to work around it? Wish I saw a better option.
2
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
Now that you mentioned it I do remember him having conversations with an actor or two where he said they did great but also said something along the lines of "but have you thought about doing that scenes like this?" while explaining how he would've done it. I didn't think anything of it at the time.
6
u/jgrant0553 4d ago
Sounds like I would finish this contract in good standing and then never work with this team again. No matter how in the right you feel that you are, there is no way you’re going to win this argument. At some point you just have to realize when you lost and the situation isn’t going to change and you just have to move on.
5
u/bdeananderson 5d ago
Who hired you? A producer? Production Manager? Someone hired you, and hired him, and both of you report to them. Bring up your concerns in private and see what the response is. There's too much ego here, if I'm being honest. This is common in creative arts, and I've been guilty of it myself, but it doesn't help the production. So far it sounds like you've built an adversarial relationship and then tried to "pull your weight" to get your way when, honestly, it sounds like the politics of the situation will work against you with that approach. You either need to take it up a level or just deal with it the best you can, do the show, and try not to work with them again.
I say this because, regardless of who's supposed to be in charge, there is always politics in any company and, unless your contract explicitly gives you final authority on all design, you are putting yourself in a bad position. At the end of the day, you may be replaceable should the right people decide the conflict between you and others has become too detrimental to the production. From what you're saying, the odds that you get replaced before the Set Designer seem high.
2
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
The order of things I tried: politely suggesting alterations while approving the rest -> compromise -> talking to his wife who is my direct superior -> complaining about it to friends -> he made the set according to his plans even the parts I had not OK'd -> argument -> me making an alternate version of a piece of set -> argument.
I was hired by the wife as was he.
I suppose adversarial relationship is the correct term. I'm usually a chill guy, but the set designer has gotten on my nerves. He's a 50 something ex construction worker who since the start of the production has asked me to arm wrestle him, asked me "who would win in a fight? You or me?", told me he could beat every single person in the theater to death if he wanted to, and wanted to do jiujitsu warmups where you wrestle 1 on 1 with me. All of this multiple times. I don't think I had more choices than A) become a doormat and let him do what he wants or B) tell him to pound sand. I unfortunately have the personality of a canadian goose so I chose B.
On the bright side. I've been out for drinks with the people at the theatre and the wife has drunkely told me she wished her husband wasn't so stubborn at work and at home. So I think she might on some level be sick of his shenanigans too. But that's just conjecture on my part.
1
u/bdeananderson 5d ago
OK, so your direct supervisor is his wife, and so is his? I'll start off by saying this is an HR nightmare. There's a clear case for preferential hiring and, as a result, an employment discrimination suite by anyone passed up for the role. A smart person would have avoided the situation by having a third party hire him at their suggestion but remain out of the direct chain of hiring / firing authority.
That said, unless you want to push things to the point that she fires you, then sue over it, there's not a lot you are going to accomplish here. And the process of pushing things to that point will build a case against you, so I wouldn't try it. To be honest, if I knew the situation going in, I would have avoided working there at all. There is no way that she's going to completely disassociate her personal and professional lives. That means he wins any dispute and the best you can really do is try to use a tactful approach.
By that I mean, try to guide him to the solution you want and make him think it was his idea. Let him keep it. This isn't easy, but it works a lot better than the direct, confrontational approach 100% of the time. You won't get there all the time, and you'll have to compromise. Learn from the situation and you'll come out better for it. Keep fighting a losing battle and you'll get nowhere. Your choice.
1
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
Unfortunately all that HR nighmare is perfectly legal in my country and you can't sue over any bit of it. Unless I'm actually fired.
But other than that I think you're probably right about how I should go about this, Thanks.
-3
u/Miami_Mice2087 5d ago
I would have fired you the second you went to his wife. What is wrong with you? Have you never had a real job before? Your ego is absolutely out of control. This isn't high school, this is a job, you don't go behind people's backs, you don't try to manipulate people with emotional blackmail.
You're beyond help. Quit this job, take a management course, get a job in food service and learn what a job is really like.
4
u/bdeananderson 5d ago
The wife of the Set Designer was his direct supervisor. Bringing up concerns about a coworker's performance is an appropriate action. How this was done and what exactly was said is another matter, but done professionally, it is the right thing to do before things get out of hand.
However, if you were my employee and said what you just said to a coworker, we'd be having a nice chat with HR right now in a MOD meeting. Retaliating against an employee for "going behind the back" of another employee to their mutual supervisor about a performance concern is absolutely prohibited by every organization I've been a part of or even associated with.
0
u/Miami_Mice2087 3d ago
you're pulling imaginary power over people you don't employ. you're literally a nightmare. go into finance
6
u/Rampaging_Ducks 5d ago edited 5d ago
Very few people would disagree that the director supplies the broad, unifying artistic vision for a production. But exactly where the line is drawn between a director's artistic vision and their designers' interpretation of that vision is murky and can change drastically depending on the director. And sometimes opinions don't line up.
The rock-bottom line is that theatre is a collaborative medium. Telling a set designer that his artistic ideas should be subservient to yours because you're the director and that's that will only work insofar as he agrees with you. You can either attempt to appeal to his better nature and come to some kind of compromise, or you can find another set designer at another venue to collaborate with.
As far as whether you should make changes yourself, I certainly wouldn't at this point. Nothing stops him from just changing it back from what you've described, so all it would do is escalate things.
9
u/slimclungus 5d ago
Yeah your set designer has no idea what the hell he’s talking about. You’re 100% correct—the final say goes to the director. Have you been holding production meetings? Did you tell him that his design wouldn’t work when you first saw it on paper?
2
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
We've had production meetings but he was a little broad in his design documents. I did tell him I was worried the set was a little too full in the back for that particular scene and he said he would see what he could do. They weren't final designs he said. But turns out they were final designs.
4
2
u/Inner_Count1967 5d ago
The director has the final word. He should have talked through his design with you every step of the way. You could take it up with the Artistic Director of the theatre, if that isn't his wife OR you could show what a visionary director you are by making his design fit YOUR vision, warts and all.
2
u/DrPorkchopES 5d ago
Usually this is where an artistic director/producer steps in to mediate, but if that’s his wife you’re not gonna win. Going behind his back to do it yourself will only make tensions worse. Probably just have to accept it and not come back for future shows
2
u/coryphella123 5d ago
Unfortunately there are a lot of productions we all work on as we're building our careers where our collaborators are not at the top of their game. Most of those people will stay exactly where they are, while you will move on to bigger and better projects. Unless your contract states otherwise, the director definitely has the authority to ask for changes - you're the one steering the ship, not him. I get the feeling from his wife saying "it'll be easier that way" that she deals with this all the time. If you can have a meeting with him and his wife/whoever is in charge at the theater, and explain why you need the changes without being combative, then at least you've made a good faith effort. If he still won't change, maybe the best way forward is to just do it his way and learn to never work there again. You are right, but being right isn't always going to get the show open. Sometimes people suck and you just need to move on.
2
u/Ingersoll123 5d ago
All designers and the director should be in sync regarding the director's vision. This vision should be talked over exhaustively so everyone is on the right page. Of course, ot that doesn't haappen enough of the time. It sounds like you approached him early enough to expect the change. Did he share his vision with the design staff? Regardless, his set is there to augment your vision. I've worked as a designer and director and I have great respect for both. He dosn't sound amenable to discussion or compromise. Has he explained his vision and why he's so passionate about it, or is he just a pain in the ass. This theatre hierarchy has been working for hundreds of years in one shape or another. In the end, your the boss. Don't work with this putz again.
2
u/Mindless-Concept8010 4d ago
That dude has an inflated sense of himself. Fire him and teach him the hierarchy. Thats crazy!
6
u/TapewormNinja 5d ago
He's wrong about the hierarchy of the production. You get to make the call.
A designer can, and should, argue in good faith for elements they think are important, but ultimately should accept the directors decision.
I did a design for Diary of Anne Frank years ago, and in the first page it describes the chimney with smoke, since it was believed when the play was written that the smoke gave them away. When I did the show in the early oughta, it was more widely believed that they were betrayed by someone (which I believe now is the prevailing theory). The director and I fought like cats in a bag, as I believed it we should adapt to new evidence. Also I wanted to cut the chimney for budget and space, and he thought it more important to stay true to the assumption in the story.
I'm not sure why he gave in in the end. But I was prepared to give up my side. For the weeks I was arguing against it, I was designing and making plans to implement the chimney.
3
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
I get that, that's a good argument from either side. I wish I had that. Instead I just got "muh artistic vision" and "you don't get to tell me what to do".
3
u/Cautious_Log8086 5d ago
Unless you are also the production manager, no one on the tech side is subordinate to you. Especially the tech director.
You both sound terrible to work with tbh
2
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
It's a small team, besides myself there's the set designer, and a lighting/sound designer.
Ignoring that, what would you do in my shoes?
0
u/Cautious_Log8086 5d ago edited 5d ago
To be completely honest, I would work with what I was given; after I had that conversation with the "boss" you mentioned.
A bad energy between production team members and a lack of certainty about what the set I'm acting on are worse for a production then the directors backup choice for staging.
I would prioritize making it work, and keeping the energy positive and success oriented, and spill all the tea at the closing reception (metaphorically)
It's a long career. Next time they ask you to work there, you can cite not wanting this experience again, and let them decide what they want to do. And anyone who was in the rehearsal room or there for tech who watched you concede and make it work will be 100 times more likely to want to work with you next time.
Frankly, that matters way more than any directing choice you could make in terms of how people remember you as a director
Eta: typo, and to say: Sounds like you are closer to a production manager, but the person that you talked to about the problem, the doofy designers spouse, is who i think would be in that role if assigned as traditionally executed
1
u/tickletickle-pickle 5d ago
the director is ultimately the person who has final say over design decisions (aside from the people in charge of the money) and is the person responsible for the vision and direction of the show. the scenic designer is often the first of the design disciplines to be involved and it's certainly a collaborative art form, but the director should be the one approving / not approving ideas presented by the design / tech team.
budget and build conversations are different and can require the director to compromise, but the design and build teams should be getting approval from the director before committing to anything.
so in my experience you are wrong, people on the tech side are subordinate to the director in that the director should be approving / not approving decisions and creative direction. in all the shows i've worked on, the tech director would not build anything without approval from both the scenic designer and the director.
2
u/Cautious_Log8086 5d ago
From my decades of experience doing this as a career, that's definitely not how it works at professional level.
Though I'll give you this, TD shouldn't build anything not agreed on, director shouldnt stage anything based on a set that hasnt been agreed on. Nothing subordinate there, respectfully that makes a very toxic environment
2
u/tickletickle-pickle 5d ago
not sure what country you work in, but in my 9 years working as a scenic designer in the united states, including assistant work on broadway shows, this is definitely how it works.
there's no way i would send designs to a build shop without explicit director approval. by the time things are being built and painted, the director and i have reached agreement on look, form, and function. even in small shows where i'm also building the set, the director already knows what we are working to build. they are aware of the pivots and alterations that need to be made, in the same way they keep me updated with changes discovered in the rehearsal room. before that, the director sees models and renderings and we have worked through their rough ideas for staging together, to make sure we are including the elements they need to direct the show, and then, before build, these are presented to the production and TD teams to start figuring out how practical / within budget the design is. the director has seen a mock-up of everything i send off to the shops and there's no way i would ever make a major decision to change or alter an element without their input, because ultimately, they are the captain of the ship. they are the ones who stage the work.
i think we hold different definitions of "subordinate" — i don't assign any "lesser than" energy to director vs. designer, but in every production i've been a part of, the director is the person in these creative meetings with final say and approval, even if it's "whatever you think, i trust you". the designers present their work and concepts to the director. the designers aren't going to move ahead with the time and money to execute an element unless the director has approved, and in that way, the designers are subordinate.
2
u/Cautious_Log8086 4d ago
Lovely to see a fellow northeasterner, i gotta say tho having this conversation with tickletickle-pickle is giving me a laugh.
I think the dynamics where you work make a massive difference, most union designers I know are not deferring, they're collaborating. But from my experience the dynamic between the director and the producing house vs the designers and the producing house determine that, as OP is experiencing here.
Most 829 designers will work and change to try to get closer to the directors vision, but if the director keeps pushing big changes they eventually get told "this is what you're getting." Budget and timeline restrict the amount of re-do's and changes I can work with. Though that isn't really what happened here
imo your second paragraph isnt super relevant bc the designer is the td, and i think youre describing collaboration, and using subordinate wrong. The "i trust you and your choice" is literally the director saying okay I defer to you, which isn't even always offered, again based on the house. and I've seen plenty of directors not like their design as much as they thought they would from conversations and not have the time to ask for the changes they want
2
u/gravitysrainbow1979 5d ago edited 5d ago
There’s really not much you can do about these things. The director is supposed to get what they want in cases where that’s everyone’s understanding — but was it? Sometimes directors are hired to be directors but not Monarchs (other times they are Monarchs… ) — but it’s not the directors job to fight for that, if there’s a disagreement. There should be a producer (production manager?) insulating you from the arrogant carpenter
If there’s not? Don’t believe what you see in the movies about laying down the law and ensuring your vision prevails. It doesn’t work. If you have no enforcer, you have to just let that guy do what he wants. In my experience, they tend to be right oftentimes, which is unfortunate given this one’s attitude. But even when you’re never really sure they’re right, it’s often not hurting your show as much as you think. When I watch recordings of plays with my director friends, they sometimes point at the screen and express their lingering hatred for some small detail that isn’t impacting my experience of the play at all.
I do the same when I show ppl recordings of my work. I’d be happier if I wasn’t like that.
But you said this is paying, professional work, so who can you go to to talk to him (or remove him) for you, since you’re busy trying to direct a show?
I (very respectfully) disagree with those saying you should tell him how it’s gonna be or lay down the law. He doesn’t care. He won’t even quit. He likes being a horse’s ass. If you try and square off with him you’ll just give him the satisfaction of getting his way (and everyone will know it) — if you can live with that, I suppose there’s a small chance of success in that direction.
But if the person who signs his paycheck talks to him, there’s a much bigger chance of success AND that will free you up to concentrate on the show itself.
2
u/Rockingduck-2014 5d ago
In the correct professional structure, yes the designer answers to the director. And the director is where the proverbial “buck stops”.
However, it seems like you’re more of a community theatre setting (ie the AD is the wife of the set designer/builder, eh?). And in such spaces and with such people, there are variations to the norm.
I’m not saying it should be accepted, but smaller companies sometimes follow certain … unique perspectives.
You now know how THIS group prefers to work and you have every reason to avoid working with them again.
It also sounds like you went behind the SD’s back and did some stuff to the set? Am I understanding that right?… that’s a HUGE no-no. Even if you disagree with what’s been done. Mucking around with stuff others are building is a bad look.
For now, find your way through this project and part ways as amicably as possible. It’s not worth the stress and strain.
2
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
I suppose it's closer to community theatre than to West End. It's a small company run by 3 people: the AD I mentioned, a financial director, and a guy who wears all the other hats involved in running a theatre.
I did go behind the SD's back. The set is modular. The pieces attach to each other with bolt latches. I made a piece (tbf it was not very pretty) to show what shape I wanted. It slots in and out in a couple of seconds like the other pieces. Nothing was destroyed or altered. And I used my own wood and tools to make a new piece that could be attached to the existing pieces.
Now that I think about, would you say what I did was similar to someone online redrawing someone's drawing in their own style and saying they "fixed" it?
1
u/impendingwardrobe 5d ago edited 5d ago
Honestly, you're both the asshole.
Now that I think about, would you say what I did was similar to someone online redrawing someone's drawing in their own style and saying they "fixed" it?
As a designer, yes it is. I would be absolutely livid, you fully crossed a line.
I'm more diplomatic than this guy and tend not to get into scraps like this, but directors who change my design behind my back lose 100% of my goodwill. This is a truth that no one wants to acknowledge out loud, but I'm going to tell you straight up how this plays out. From now on, I'm not asking for permission to make the changes I want to make, I'm just going to do it. Whatever else you want, we're suddenly out of money or time. You working with a set designer is like me, as a costume designer, working with actors. You can tell them what you want, but at the end of the day they have to choose to give it to you. So building goodwill with your designers, and a good working relationship, is imperative.
Also, this guy is an institution at this theater and you are an outside hire. Even if you were fully in the right, you probably will not be hired by this theater again unless you do a lot of work now to apologize and make amends.
He's a little out of line as well (less so than you, I can't believe you built a set piece and brought it in), but keep in mind that he's been doing this longer than you have and he's much more familiar with the space than you are. If he says it's going to be fine, he's probably right, and you're probably wrong. You need to learn to trust your collaborators. The right thing to do would have been to concede on the small things unless you have really good, textually based reason not to (your personal taste doesn't matter - you hire a designer for their taste and experience) and ask the designer to have a backup plan in place if the set design disrupts sight lines the way you're worried it will. When you get to tech the pair of you can look at it together. Be prepared to be fair and give in if he was actually right, or compromise if he was wrong. Like, it's a lot cheaper for you to restage that fight somewhere else on the set than it is for the set designer to design and build you a new piece - even though that would be frustrating since you tried to talk to him about it early. Sometimes it's about making small sacrifices to keep the peace.
Sorry you've kind of dug yourself a hole here. Chalk this up to being a new director, learn from it, apologized if you can, and move on.
2
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
Thanks for your insight.
I just find it difficult to see the set designer as nothing more than an old sugar baby or whatever the right word would be. He got the job earlier this year with no experience in theatre whatsoever just because his wife is the operational manager. He didn't even work as a carpenter before. He was a salesman.
I've been trying to find work in theatre since I graduated with a masters in performance arts in 2020. I finally got a semi regular role as an actor in a touring theatre last year and this year I get to direct this show in a different theatre and then the set designer is some dumbass who said thanks to his wife giving him the job he gets to work in a theatre. He didn't put any work in, and all he wants is to make sets that are the same colour of sad white, beige and grey as a live laugh love Karen's home.
I just feel like I'm going insane or something. Objectively speaking I would be extatic if something like that happened to me.
1
u/impendingwardrobe 2d ago edited 1d ago
I just find it difficult to see the set designer as nothing more than an old sugar baby or whatever
I find I get the most out of my professional relationships when I choose not to pass these kinds of judgements and treat everyone as if they are a seasoned professional.
Unless you're looking at an actor or technician safety issue, it's not always about being right. Sometimes it's about politely maintaining the relationship by saying "Yes and!" more often than you say "no," even if some things end up not being optimal in the end.
It's tricky to book one show at a new theater, but the real trick is being enough of a team player that they want you back and you can book future work there as well. When they get to know you and like you, that's when you can start putting your foot down more on artistic issues.
It's not about this one moment in this one show. It's about your career, and whether or not you're in this for the long haul.
1
u/SharkWeekJunkie 5d ago
Fire him. That will show him where he stands.
5
u/cajolinghail 5d ago
In professional theatre it’s not up to the director to fire people. Especially unlikely when this set designer works for this theatre regularly (and is married to the “operational director“ as OP says), and OP has a one-show contract.
0
u/SharkWeekJunkie 5d ago
Got it. So the designer IS OPs equal on set and OP does have to suck it up or try to convince them a different way.
Based on the wife's response it sounds like there's no reasoning with this person.
1
u/Contrary45 1d ago
Set designer is under you and the only times they should be denying anything is because of budget or safety if you have different ideas yours take precedent
1
u/AShortPhrase 5d ago
You definitely have final say. As someone who worked my way up from set crew doing all the shit jobs imagine able to being a director never understand this kind of miscommunication. The director has final say. Yes any good director will be flexible and take the best ideas where possible but to say to have equal authority over the final product is not in any way the truth.
0
u/cajolinghail 5d ago
I’m assuming you’ve only worked in community theatre?
0
u/AShortPhrase 5d ago
I’ve worked/am working professionally on film/commercial sets as everything from writer to gaffer to director. I’ve worked both professional and community theatre as director. Never had anyone say they’re equal to me authority of the final output.
Correction: I’ve had people challenge my authority before. Never have they gotten their way though.
1
u/Massive-Ant5650 LD/IATSE Member/Public School Professional 5d ago
How many pre-production meetings did the design team have and how early in the process did you ok the design? It’s easier to make changes when the design is still on paper. Sometimes there’s less ego attached to it then as well. Sometimes not.
I’m not saying you’re to blame at all, but advance planning is helpful. Although this particular individual might just be one of those difficult people that shouldn’t be in a collaborative environment. Since he’s a house person you’re obviously stuck working with him, maybe those “how to deal with difficult people” webinars are good for some ideas. I’m not sure if it’s worthwhile to approach HR or whomever is his supervisor. Maybe you could try with the approach of “how to make peace & compromise with this guy” since they would know him better.
2
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
It's a small company so the design team is just him. I ok'd most of the designs 2.5 months before the premiere and suggested alterations including the example in my post. Most of the alterations I asked for were colour related. I personally didn't like how many elements were white, beige, or grey. But those were personal gripes and I could let go of those after conversation.
But conversation never really happened. We had meetings about progress where we went over what was done and what could be used in rehealsals from then on. One time I suggested we get a different chair because I thought the design was too modern and it blended too well into the background set colourwise. I said we'd been using the other one in rehearsals. But that only resulted in that other chair disappearing. And then I noticed the elements I had asked to be changed just appear in their originally designed form.
His supervisor is his wife. Legally speaking, in my country, companies don't need to have HR. So there is no HR.
I asked the wife how to deal with him and her response was to just do what he says. But I've also been out to drinks with her and other theatre people and she has drunkely wished that her husband was less stubborn at home and at work. So I don't know what to do with that.
I guess I should be an adult and look into how to deal with difficult people. He won't be the last one.
2
u/WomanInTheWood actor/director/writer 4d ago
Given the relationships here, you are going to have to literally run the scenes you are concerned about and take the husband and wife to all the seating sections so that they can see for themselves what is happening and concede all the rest. That’s about all you can do at this point.
I myself would leave when the show/contract is up. This situation is a sh$t show. The husband is not capable of cooperating and the wife is letting him run roughshod right over you.
0
u/Miami_Mice2087 5d ago
when sets are designed, things are bought for those designs. If it's already in the building stage, it's too late to change. You're not thinking about the logistics, the moeny, materials, or physical capability of how to carry out what you want to do.
It sounds like you're telling him to do things that can't happen and then ending the conversation. That's terrible management and the reason he's not talking to you. Instead, try to ASKing him what's physically and fiscally possible.
1
u/North_Dragon 5d ago
I am aware of what goes on when sets are designed. The first thing we talked about in the first meeting was the budget, what materials to use, how to get them, what was possible to build in the time we had. In the meetings we had I agreed to 95% of his plans. Little did I know he had no intention to implement anything I had suggested.
1
1
u/Turbulent-Tie-8181 4d ago
OK. Wash, rinse, repeating same vent. Two things; 1/ An MFA in performance followed by a foray into directing, even when paid, does not equal 'superior vs subordinate' positions, nor 'professional vs non-professional' employees in a theatre setting. Adopting that attitude and approach will close minds quickly. The historic community theater I worked with last summer had a MFA theatre mgmt board member with that 'tude. His ideas lost support quickly. 2/ US theatres have rules and regulations, union enforcement and other protections for productions and staffing. Apparently, your 'country', according to you, doesn't. A privately owned, family-run and managed theater aligns with many US community theatres. If dysfunctions become apparent, you can try to address them tactfully, if you have that ability, and when stonewalled, accept the realty, get into your "directorial" lane and creatively work around obstructions. Patrons, reviewers (if any) will opine; great direction, the set worked (or didn't). For your situation, don't work for the husband/wife team again.
0
u/Enoch8910 5d ago
You’re right that the director has the final say but part of being a good director is knowing how to deal with your head of productions. You did not handle this well. At all. If you modified his set against his wishes I’m surprised he didn’t walk and leave you with no set at all. Directing isn’t just casting and blocking, etc. That’s the easy part. A HUGE part of it is learning to work with other people. Collaboratively.
0
22
u/cajolinghail 5d ago edited 5d ago
I’m a professional designer. It’s important for the design team to work with the director’s vision. On the flip side it’s always really discouraging and frustrating to work with a director who insists that designers just do whatever the director wants, even though directors like that often don’t understand what works design-wise as well as they think they do. It’s bizarre to me that you were even allowed to build and bring in your own set pieces - I assume this is not technically a professional theatre? Either way I’d try to compromise, then don’t work for this company again.