Ed Steele: 1980

Having faced up to the Theatre’s financial crisis that had begun two years earlier, Steele was confronted with a great challenge when he assumed the theatre’s top leadership position.  Taking on this role was certainly not an easy way to begin his time as Artistic Director, as the Theatre was deeply in debt.  But, Steele was no stranger to the situation, as he had served as Wayside’s General Manager the previous year.

In 1980, the local press printed a number of articles dealing with the Theatre’s financial plight, along with proposals to over-come this situation.  It is safe to say that Wayside’s financial stability had been a continuing problem dating back to its creation, but this particular crisis was large and needed a great deal of creativity in finding a solution. 

Many suggestions were submitted to solve the 1980 crisis.  The Theatre requested and received a grant for management assistance from The Foundation for Extension and Development of American Professional Theatre (FEDAPT).  The assistance offered by FEDAPT provided consultants “for as long as they are needed, who will oversee the organization of the theatre” (May, P. “Wayside Theatre Receives ….” WES.  3 Apr. 1980).  But, FEDAPT only provided consulting services, no financial assistance of any kind. 

The reasons for the cause of this particular financial crisis are found in an article that states, “Wayside’s future was placed in doubt in January when producing director James Kirkland, in announcing he was leaving, revealed a deficit in excess of $80,000 …”  (May, P.  “Wayside Theatre Receives ….” TWS. 3 Apr. 1980).  In an interview reflecting on the Theatre’s past troubles, it was learned that, “Under Jim Kirkland, Wayside tried to do too much with too little.  During two summer seasons, payroll and production expenses pushed the theatre beyond its financial limit.” The article further states that “Kirkland was fond of expansive sets and ambitious productions and thought nothing of bringing in high-priced guest directors such as Davey Marlin-Jones.” The article fails to mention that Marlin-Jones and other directors of his stature had worked at Wayside during previous seasons. The article concludes,

The final blow came when Kirkland inaugurated a fall series of Shakespeare
that bombed at the box office and was panned by the local critics.  That venture
was canned after one play and, reportedly, a $30,000 loss (Strohmeyer.  “Wayside Theatre Making ….” TWS.  1 Apr. 1983).

To rectify this financial situation and continue the eighteen-year tradition of professional theatre, the Board engaged in intensive fund raising among friends and organizations.  The response was positive, and Steele acknowledges that,

The thing that I find most encouraging is the people in our community.  Their
response has always been positive.  They understand the importance of the
theater and they want to see it continue as a viable art form in the community
(May, P.  “Wayside Theatre Receives….” TMJ. 3 Dec. 1973). 

The intense work done by Steele and three board members, Mr. Lewis Costello, Mr. Bill Clement, and Dr. George Moore, eventually paid off.  These four men met weekly and were determined to keep the struggling theatre open.  They evidently spent hours trying to find a solution to resolving the debt, to saving the theatre, and still have a summer season. Their solution worked: reduce the number of shows offered during that season and select shows with small casts.  At first, they had planned a season of only two shows, but found a way to mount three titles.  Each show used only two actors and had minimal set requirements. 

When Steele announced the 1980 season, he was convinced the line-up of shows would sell tickets, as it would consist of a known musical, a comedy, and a drama (Strohmeyer. “Wayside Theatre Is Fighting ….” NVD.  11 Feb. 1980).  In addition to the three-play season, the theatre also planned to produce a Christmas show and, more importantly, to continue supporting the very successful revenue producer, the Wayside Theatre on Tour (May, P.  “Wayside Theatre Receives….”  TWS.  3 Apr. 1980).

One source reveals that it was not until the resignation of James Kirkland that the seriousness of the Theatre’s debt was known.  At the time Kirkland was hired, Wayside had a debt of $10,000, but this mushroomed to $80,000 during his tenure.  What was the reason for this huge deficit?  One board member speaks of the ill-fated post-season plan to mount three Shakespeare plays that had failed to click with the local residents, as “being an extremely poor artistic and management decision.” Another board member states, “I think that the theatre has not been monitored monetarily as closely as the board thought it had been” (Strohmeyer. “Wayside Theatre Is ….”  NVD.  11 Feb. 1980).  Others confess that, “The Wayside board of directors had little to do with the day-to-day operations of the theater during Kirkland’s tenure … and was surprised when the severity of the theater’s financial problems came to light” (Strohmeyer.  “Wayside Theatre Making ….” TWS. 1 Apr. 1983).

It was in this negative financial situation that Ed Steele launched the 1980 season as Wayside’s new Artistic Director, although he had been a part of the organization the previous year.  He states that during his time at the Theatre, he was constantly “battling both the deficit and the stigma of impending doom” (Strohmeyer.  “Wayside Theatre Is ….”). It seems that Wayside’s problems were created by the unfortunate fact that, “Kirkland operated as both an artistic director and as a general manager.”  In retrospect, Wayside officials agree that “Kirkland was not cut out for the dual role.”  As a result of this administrative mistake,

the board has now begun to take an active role in the direction of the theater.  Up
until Kirkland’s departure, the board gave artistic directors free rein over theater operations.  In that respect, the board must share the blame for Wayside’s near
demise (Strohmeyer. “Wayside Theatre Hoping ….” NVD.  9 July 1980).

Board chairman, Dr. George Moore, sums up the change in the management approach to the theatre, “I guess you could call us a management tool …. We’re as close to being a business board as an artistic board can be.”  Strohmeyer writes further that, “The board has now begun to take an active role in the direction of the theatre.”  Steele applauds the Board’s move stating, “[they have] taken it upon themselves to really look at the fiscal problems of this theater.  There is a fine line between commerce and art, and it’s a line that I think at times must be crossed more often.  Commerce has to be tied to art” (Strohmeyer. 9 Juy 1980). 

When one reads the above paragraphs regarding the theatre’s 1980 financial status, there is a certain feeling of deja-vu, as these same words could have been written in 2013.  The situation that brought about the near-closing of the Theatre in 1980 was the same situation that brought about the demise of the Theatre in 2013:  poor financial management, non-involvement of the Board, and one person serving as both Artistic Director and General Manager.  One has only to change the names and the dates to see that the 1980 and 2013 situations were almost identical.  It is unfortunate that in 2013, the Theatre’s board, the Theatre administration, and the general public did not know of the Theatre’s financial trouble that had occurred thirty years earlier and how it was solved.  Had this history been known to those who were involved, perhaps the Theatre would still be in existence.

Steele had arrived at Wayside in 1979 at the invitation of the Board while Kirkland was still the Artistic Director and he was charged with helping bail the theatre out of its financial chaos. This could account for the confusion in dates as to which of the two men was actually in charge as it stems from the records of the theatre itself as well as how the listing of the names and dates of the Artistic Directors was done.  The Theatre’s chronology consistently lists Steele as the Artistic Director in 1979, when, in reality, Kirkland was still serving in that capacity.   

Regardless of the confusion with dates, it was Steele’s decision, along with Dr. George Moore, the Board chairman, that only three shows were to be produced for the 1980 season, and that the cast for each of these shows would require only two people.  The first production was I Do! I Do!, a two-person musical that had previously been staged at Wayside in 1970.  A reviewer for the 1980 production stated, “Wayside Theatre’s do-or-die summer season is off to an unqualified successful start.  Under the able direction of Harold Herman, Wayside has fashioned its first - - and hopefully, not last - - triumph of the season.”  The writer credits the production’s success to excellent direction as well as the stunning performances by the two actors, Judith Reagan and Tony Gilbert. He adds, “Their singing is nothing short of marvelous” and calls “this handbook of marriage … as engrossing a production as Wayside has produced in the past three seasons” (Strohmeyer.  “ ‘I Do! I Do’ ….” NVD.  11 July 1980).  The musical accompaniment was under the direction of Walter Geismar, who led a three-piece ensemble placed “on the floor, house right” and never overwhelmed the singers (Caplin. Interview).  The set was highly imaginative as well, including “a subtle conversion of a gas chandelier to an electric one” (Patton, “It’s a Top Job for Wayside.”  TWS.  10 July 1980).

The second of the two-actor season show was Two for the Seesaw, summarized as being a play that “doesn’t have to make you laugh or cry to be good.”  One reviewer compares these two characters with those in other plays or films, and concludes, “You leave the play with mixed feelings” (Patton.  “ ‘Two for the Seesaw,’ Two ….”  TWS.  1 Aug. 1980).  Another finds the script compelling and suggests that, with a play of this intensity, the director should “take another look at the play and give it more feeling and less gusto” (Strohmeyer. “Wayside Play Falls Short.”  NVD.  21 July 1980). 

The third and final of the two-person offerings was Same Time Next Year, another one-set play that received high praise for the designer who did a “magnificent job with the set giving the illusion of a ceiling and additional rooms one would expect to find.”  Patton also credits the two actors as being perfectly natural in their roles who “remain true selves.”  The reviewer laments that this is the final opportunity to see these actors on Wayside’s stage, “so, see them before they leave” (Patton.  “Wayside’s ‘Same Time’: …. ” TWS . 14 Aug. 1980).

While the ‘three two-person play’ season was necessary to keep Wayside in existence and using one actor in all three productions and another actor in two, the abbreviated summer season took its toll.  The season “gets a little long in the tooth to limit plays to two characters.  One keeps hoping that someone will pop in the door and give the two performers, and the audience, a break” (Strohmeyer.  “One of Two Actors ….” NVD.  15 Aug. 1980).

Although the 1980 summer season closed out on August 31, one more show was in the schedule.  This was Steele’s adaptation of the Dickens’ classic, A Christmas Carol.  If records are correct, this would have been the third time this title had been performed by Wayside.  In this particular version, only two characters are credited in the program:  Alden Redgrave as the Narrator, and Ken Stack as Scrooge.  The remainder of the cast, listed as Ensemble, would step forward to become characters within the context of the story. 

The reviews of A Christmas Carol in the local press were mixed.  The energy of the cast is noted as a plus, but also as a detraction.  One writer explained,

Ken Stack performs the role of Scrooge with delight and whimsy,  But sometimes
it is just that energy which interferes with or overwhelms the understatement or psychological subtlety needed to show a genuine transformation in Scrooge …. [his] Scrooge has a habit of always being a little too emphatic in his rejections of the Christmas spirit, or too emphatic in his remorse.  Also, he has a way of screwing up
his face into a frown so often that it begins to appear plastic (Harstock.  “An Energetic ‘Christmas Carol’ ….”  TWS.  18 Dec. 1980). 

Despite this observation, the writer pronounced the production totally successful. 

By contrast, another writer states the Christmas Carol production ‘Dazzles,’ and gives high praises to Stack’s dynamic energy that “not only never flags, it seems to recharge like a car battery:  the more he performs, the higher his energy level climbs.”  And, by contrast, “he ages perceptibly … like an acrobat defying the laws of gravity …” (Sorrell.  “Wayside’s ‘Christmas Carol’ Dazzles.” NVD.  22 Dec. 1980).  Sorrell takes the time in his review to single out individual cast members, awarding each a paragraph of praise.

For this final production of the season, it was announced that the 1980 Christmas show would take place at a new curtain time:  8:00 rather than 8:30.  It was hoped this new time would be a permanent change. 

The WTOT production for the year continued the Theatre’s season by offering the highly successful children’s program, Virginia Summer Mysteries, an “original touring show for school-age children …. Funding for the tour will, once again, be provided from the Commission for the Arts” (Studebaker, M.  “Valley Theatres Offer….”  The Clarke Courier.  9 July 1992). 

At some point during 1980, Wayside played host to the Ronnie Kole Trio, a New Orleans based jazz ensemble, consisting of piano, bass, and drums, that performed at a “kickoff of the successful 1980 fundraising drive” at Wayside.  It was advertised that the purchase of a $15.00 ticket was a tax deductible contribution to the theatre. It appears that Mr. Kole became interested in Wayside after passing through Middletown on a trip from New Orleans to do a performance in DC.  A brief notice in a 1981 issue of The Winchester Star announced that the group would perform again on February 15, 1981, with a reception to be held in the Curtain Call following his concerts (“Trio to Play at Wayside.” TWS.  12 Feb. 1981).

And the abbreviated 1980 season ends on a successful note. In reading how the Theatre’s 1980 financial crisis almost closed the Theatre, one wonders if the 2013 Board was aware of this bit of past history and how it had been addressed. It isn’t difficult to speculate that if someone had shared this historical information, perhaps the Board could have incorporated some of these ideas to solve the 2013 problems, such as reducing the length of the season and returning to a shorter performance period rather than maintaining the year round schedule.  But, this is written in hindsight.