Director Richard Eyre made the point that audiences don't really need to know that Arthur Miller's "The Crucible," slated to open on Broadway March 7, is a "metaphor for American history" (the witch-hunts of the McCarthy era, to be precise). Indeed, Eyre stressed, the first time he directed the Miller play--in England decades ago--he knew little about the details of the McCarthy hearings. And it made no difference.
"I was attracted to the Miller play because it is a great story, a moral fable," Eyre noted at a One-on-One Conversation sponsored by the Stage Directors and Choreographers Foundation (SDCF). "And I loved the language. Miller has conceived a language that is neither contemporary nor a pastiche. It's a combination of King James English and the language of the actual witchcraft trials [that took place in Salem, Mass. in the 17th century]. It's a muscular language.
"Apart from the subject matter of the play, which will never go away--e.g., how a society deals with dissent and becomes repressive in the process--the play is Shakespearean in showing both the private and public sides of a man. The story is contemporary," he continued, "but it also has elements of Greek ritual in its structure and its treatment of the outcast."
The One-on-One Conversation, held on Jan. 30 at the Manhattan Theatre Club rehearsal studios, featured (in addition to British-born guest-speaker Eyre) interviewer Anne Cattaneo, a dramaturge of Lincoln Center Theater and head of the Lincoln Center Theater Director's Lab.
Cattaneo's questions opened up a freewheeling conversation that covered an array of topics--from the challenges of "The Crucible" to Eyre's directorial approach (his vision, his process); from his aesthetic influences to the fundamental differences in working with American actors as opposed to their British counterparts.
The 90-minute discussion, followed by a question-and-answer session with the audience, was part of an ongoing series (co-sponsored by the New York State Council on the Arts) that explores the careers and creative processes of some of the theatre's best-known directors and choreographers.
As noted, Eyre is currently directing "The Crucible," starring Liam Neeson and Laura Linney. His earlier credits include the Broadway productions of "Amy's View," "The Judas Kiss," "Skylight," and "Racing Demon" (at Lincoln Center). He served as the director of the London-based Royal National Theatre from 1988-1997, directing 27 productions. He has received many coveted honors, including the Laurence Olivier Award for Outstanding Achievement, Lifetime Achievement Awards from the London Critics Circle and the Directors Guild of Great Britain, and the Evening Standard Special Award.
He has written a memoir, "Utopia and Other Places," and "Changing Stages," which was the basis of his TV series for the BBC and PBS about the history of 20th-century theatre. He has directed many award-winning films for TV, and two feature films--"The Ploughman's Lunch" (Evening Standard Award), and "Iris," which he also co-wrote, starring Judi Dench as novelist Iris Murdoch. The highly praised film is currently playing in the States and the United Kingdom and just received three Oscar nominations.
Directing in Different Media
Among the topics of conversation was the difference in directing for stage, film, and TV, respectively.
Comparing TV with theatrical films, Eyre remarked that theatrical movies have the element of fable, whereas TV flicks are usually more contemporary and earthbound. For the most part, they don't resonate in the same way theatrical films do. Still, from the director's point of view, there's an overlap, at least in terms of approach, he said.
Directing for the stage, however, is very different. It is up to the director to focus the audience's attention, "engineer the choreography," to use Eyre's phrase. In movies and film, the camera does that. More relevant, on stage the focal point is usually the actor who is speaking. In film, asserted Eyre, stage directions take precedence over dialogue, and the most intriguing character is often the one who is not talking.
Eyre is not big on being an "auteur" on film or on stage. He is a great admirer of Peter Brook. Nonetheless, "not everyone has to be a concept director," he stressed. "I believe the heart of all theatre is the human being, and whatever you do on stage, you cannot dissolve the human body or the human voice. Theatre resists abstraction. At the center there is always a messy human being.
"My policy," he continued, "is to work with all the human elements. Part of the role of the director is to create a healthy society [of actors and behind-the-scene creators], all of whom are contributing members with a common aim. The circle is complete when the audience is there, saying 'We love this society.' That's what makes theatre so intoxicating."
Eyre acknowledged the widespread influence of Stanislavski at one end of the spectrum and Brecht at the other, yet he is most indebted to the work of writer-actor-director Harley Granville-Barker, whose theories came from the day-to-day practice of theatre. "He was sensible and practical." For Eyre, the empirical always takes precedence over the theoretical.
Contrary to what one might expect from a director, Eyre emphasized that he is open to everyone's input and, indeed, encourages it. He truly believes, he said, that most people who are involved in a production want it to succeed, so they may be worth listening to. He added that audiences often have valid responses, and so do critics.
"I don't believe theatre artists who say, 'I never read reviews and I don't care.' I know I do."
Eyre made reference to the difficulty, however, in having to work with seven executive producers on "Iris," all of whom had assistants. And everyone had an opinion, feeling free to voice it. "You develop a kind of Zen calm."
Eyre talked about the difference between heading a theatre and working as a freelance director. He conceded that he missed the daily comradeship and the freedom--that comes with the producer's hat--to hire himself as a director. On the other hand, you have to be able to take pleasure in other people's accomplishments as well, meaning hiring another director (instead of yourself) if that decision best serves the piece. All experiences have up and downsides, he underscored.
"When you head a theatre, you are responsible for everything. You don't walk across the floor without being told about the clogged toilet. When you freelance, you have to carve out your own work.
American vs. British Actors
Eyre also discussed the difference between British and American actors. "British actors are diffident and tend to be borderline lazy, except when they're working on musicals. You can't fake it with a musical," he observed. "American actors, on the other hand, have a heart-on-the-sleeve commitment to their work. They work on their roles at home and are shockingly well-prepared. The difference [between Americans and Brits] may be a difference in national personality. But it also reflects the difference in how hard it is to get a part in London and New York, respectively.