Dandelion Momma & Under Construction: An Austinist Interview with Greg Romero and Amanda Butterfield

Let's start with you, Amanda. What does all this mean to the average theatre-goer? In other words, how will this be different from other staged readings?

Our focus is on the audience. A traditional staged reading is playwright-centric, designed to allow a select group -- usually comprised mostly of other playwrights -- to get together and throw around "theatre-talk". While this can certainly be an important technical exercise, we want to find an audience's gut reaction. In essence, who cares what we we're trying to do -- let's use the audience's eyes and ears to be honest about what we've actually created. Say it. SHOUT IT!

What methods are you using to "actively seek feedback" from the audience? How will patrons be able to "engage in the development process"? Sounds like a lot of fun. Does this just mean talkbacks after performances, or something more?

It means both. It's a shame we've all agreed on the word "talkback" for any discussion that happens after a performance -- it always makes it sound so passive. What we create after our readings is a brainstorming session -- a townhall meeting of ideas -- each one building on the last -- working towards articulating the audience's collective understanding of what they just witnessed. In that way they'll make an enormous impact on the direction of the play. We hope that Greg finds their ideas challenging, off-putting, exciting and horrible all at the same time -- allowing him to break open his idea of the play and send it in a thousand new directions.

We also accept anonymous written feedback for those who don't feel comfortable voicing their opinion in the fray. That's a pretty standard, traditional approach, but it's one we find to be very effective.

Greg, how is the playwright worked into this process? Are you being asked to surrender more control than you're used to? How does this compare to other collaborative and solo writing projects you've worked on?

It is my feeling that new play development should almost always be a collaborative, but playwright-driven process, with the writer taking responsibility for identifying and taking care of the needs and shape of the project. I've always felt this way, even before I started writing plays.

This process with Yellow Tape is no exception. In fact, I initiated the process earlier this summer by approaching Jonathon [Morgan, YTCC's other co-AD and a staff writer for Austinist] and Amanda about working with them. I have always liked both of them and the work they have been doing in this city, so I convinced them to meet with me to discuss working on Dandelion Momma together.

I point these things out because I believe (to paraphrase Edward Albee) that the playwright is not merely a cog in the wheel, but, in fact, the engine of the driving force of new work. It is my experience in my six years of working on new plays that the best work comes when the playwright is as fully engaged as possible. I feel very lucky to be working with a group of people who understand and support these ideas-- and I wouldn't have sought Yellow Tape out otherwise.

As far as this particular writing process, it's actually been a lot less collaborative than I typically work and less collaborative than I typically like. I have mostly been writing this piece with little interaction with other artists and, frankly, this play so far hasn't been as much fun to create as some of my more recent, more collaborative projects. I work best when I have a team of artists to continually engage in ideas with. I'm happiest and most productive when I'm overwhelmed with ideas and materials to work with. This hasn't been the case with "Dandelion" and it's reminded me a lot about how much I need the muse of high-quality collaborators.

Thus, I have very much been waiting for rehearsals to begin so that we can all see the play up in three dimensions with talented actors, a director, and a lighting designer making choices and asking good, hard questions. The script will, undoubtedly, take several huge leaps forward with the infusion of talent and depth of thought now coming aboard the process.

We have also all benefited a lot recently with the addition of Juliane Taylor as the project's director. She brings a lot of energy and experience to the party and has been very helpful to me just through our conversations about the play and about theatre in general. In an ideal world, Jules and I would have begun collaborating on this project at the beginning of the summer (or even earlier) and she would have played a much bigger role in the development of the text. Unfortunately, the timing of this project didn't allow for that.

Another one for Amanda: We're most excited about the idea of creating "collective, community ownership of the material." It's hard to fathom feeling a sense of collective, community ownership over even our most favorite local productions. How will this be achieved?

I don't think most productions are interested, or would want you to feel collective ownership of their work. They're coming from a valid place, but we're coming from a different one. I feel like every time an audience experiences a performance that they and the performers own that moment in time -- the interaction between the two is something specific to that moment -- and, by default, has in some small way changed them both permanently. Essentially, the audience always shares ownership of a performance, and our job is to inspire them to claim it.

Creating a warm, welcoming forum where an audience can verbalize together their experience of a performance -- knowing that their ideas will have a real and significant impact on future performances -- is one way we like to go about it.

Greg, I see from reading the YTCC blog that you were still working on script development as recently as five days ago. It sounds like working the language with actors has been an informative process for you. Can you tell us more about that? Also, has YTCC set any deadlines for when you can't tweak the script any longer (pre-production)?

I feel that the text that I put on the page is really just the starting place for what the play will eventually become. My plays very much need actors and artists to work on them in space to fully develop them and bring them to life. It is this process, in fact, that often teaches me about what I've actually written.

As for the re-writing process for this project-- I will probably write up until the moment when the audience shows up in their seats. Plus, we have the good fortune of two performances, so it is possible that I may re-write in between shows and try something during the second performance based on what we learned from the previous night. I feel very fortunate to be working with a group of actors all very experienced in new works and have the skill for this kind of performance dexterity. This, to me, is as exciting as it gets.

Some practical questions. The production will be staged at the Silica House. What is the Silica House, and what is it like to produce/perform in someone's personal space? Is this new for everyone involved in the project?

GR: The Silica House is the home of playwright/musician Jason Tremblay and actor/dancer Odile Nicole Del Giudice. I have nothing but love and respect for both of them (I performed their marriage ceremony) and it is a real honor to bring a performance to their home. We will actually be in the back yard of their home, which really fits the play well. And plus, many of us involved on this project feel there is an important relationship between Art and Hospitality. This performance honors that relationship in a very cool way, especially since Jason and Nicole have been such wonderful hosts.

How many actors are in this piece? Of everything I've read, I haven't found any language at all about the plot, setting, etc. Can you give us an idea what Dandelion Momma is about?

GR:There are four actors in the play-- Lana Dieterich, Michael Kranes, Ann Taylor, and Faith Taylor. There are three connected narratives that the play follows, spanning over 70 years of history. But the history is told through fragmented pieces of memory and from a character who may or may not really exist.

There are three basic temporal locations-- the Great Depression, World War II-era, and present-day 2006. However, these locations may not be quite recognizable (they're not really naturalistic) and that's fine with me.

The story is a simple one, I think. I won't tell you what it is because I hope you'll come and see it. (Smiles.)

All images (c) Wylie Maercklein, Castle Photography (click for several more excellent photos).