Rudimentary Wings

Well, as a response to what Nate was eloquently saying, I would mention this: that perhaps a lot of the problem with "modern [popular] theater" is that there's not that much honestly contemporary about it, we're generally either stuck with the same type of stuff we've seen for hundreds of years in terms of baseless spectacle or, and this is particularly true of the contemporary Broadway musical, things that are so post-modern and referential that they really lose meaning (see: Lion King, Little Mermaid, etc.).

I think that what we and others in what is slowly becoming a movement are doing is both [r]evolutionary in that it is in many ways a rejection of contemporary theater but it is also regressive. Regressive in the way that it calls back to minimalism, particularly in the way that it is not an embrace of abstraction or abstract expressionism, say, (in our case at least) but not quite post-modernism either and certainly not modernism. Somewhere in between abstract expressionism and post-modernism I suppose. And that's what minimalism ought to be after all, traditionally at least, right?

So let's call it a Theater of Regressive Evolution, perhaps.

Oh, and, to be a little more base, also A Theater of Economic Realities.

And perhaps most of all a Theater of Results, I think that Nate would agree with the great Donald Judge who once said that "after all, the work isn't the point; the piece is."

Sincerely,
Spencer Soloway
Artistic Director
Feed the Bird