Podcast Episode 78 Transcript – Peter Lawrence

Ken: Hello, everybody out there in podcast land. Ken Davenport here. This is the Producer’s Perspective Podcast. So I was going to start this podcast by saying we have another first today, in that we have our first stage manager on the show, but to call my guest today “just a stage manager” would be like calling the president “just a politician.” I am pleased to welcome to the podcast the recipient of a Tony honor for his contributions to the theatre, Mr. Peter Lawrence. Welcome, Peter.

Peter: Thank you, Ken. That was a very good intro.

Ken: Well you deserve it. Peter has been a production stage manager, production supervisor, associate director for some of the best in the business, a director for umpteen different shows, certainly check out his Playbill Vault entry, and we’re talking massive shows. In the biz, if you’ve got a big show, Peter is the first person you call. We’re talking the original companies of Miss Saigon, Sunset Boulevard, Shrek, he’s worked alongside directors like Mike Nichols, Sam Mendes on Gypsy, where I met him, he’s actually on Long Day’s Journey Into Night right now – three hours and forty-five minutes of drama. Peter, let’s start with how you got into the business – and here’s my big impersonation of a stage manager – go!

Peter: I lied, is how I got into the business. I came to New York to be a drama critic, Ken. I had been a drama critic, I have a Master’s in MFA and Directing from the University of Hawaii – the best time of my life – and I was a drama critic for a year for the Honolulu Advertiser, which is the morning paper, and there’s an enormous amount of theatre out there and I thought “I can go to New York and be a drama critic,” so I came to New York and of course got howled out of almost every newspaper in New York City – I would write sample reviews and send them in. So I was selling tickets at the Mercer Arts Center, an off-Broadway complex of theatres that fell down, famously, in 1974, and a guy walked into the box office one day, a guy named Harvey Medlinsky. I don’t know if you know that name or not – he was Mike Nichols’ first stage manager, Barefoot in the Park, Odd Couple, he did all of those – and he had fallen on hard times and was stage managing an off-Broadway show and he said he had been hired to produce a chain of dinner theatres and did I know of any good stage managers and I said “Oh, I’m a stage manager. What does it pay?” and it paid more than I was paid at the box office so I said “Oh, I’m a stage manager,” and that literally is the start of the entire thing and I just made it up as I went along. That’s how I got started. So I went from dinner theatre to stock to off-Broadway to national tours to Broadway shows. I did my first Broadway show in 1977.

Ken: So in one sentence, if someone said “What does a stage manager do?,” how would you describe it in one sentence?

Peter: A stage manager makes things possible. For instance, every show – I can’t do it in one sentence, Ken, sorry.

Ken: No one can! I always try to get people to do it in one sentence but that’s why you’re all good guests.

Peter: Well, makes things possible, period. How’s that? But what it also means is keeping things safe, making sure that the artistic environment is safe for the actors backstage. I’m a production guy and, as we were saying even before we started this, I get sort of bored calling cues but I’m never bored putting a show together. I don’t care what the show is, I don’t care whether people think it’s good or bad, I love it. I love putting together shows. So in putting together the show, on musicals it mostly has to do with the architecture, to make sure the set can furl around and move properly and not kill anybody, and on a play it normally means keeping an environment in which the actors feel free to make fools of themselves, and Mike Nichols really taught me that, he really gave me an aesthetic about making sure that being a fool in rehearsal is an okay thing to do, because that’s how you find things in rehearsal. Mike would humiliate himself sometimes in rehearsal just to give the actors the freedom to do so. He would tell stories on himself that were terrible, humiliating stories, but then the actors felt like they could take chances. So I think my job is to make sure that everybody can do theirs. That is sometimes a new director that may need some help, sometimes it might be a designer, sometimes certain actors need help and encouragement and need a pal. It depends upon the show but I think my job is to make things possible.

Ken: Having been through the production period of so many shows, can you get a sense of when a show is going right and when a show is going wrong in that period?

Peter: You’re probably not going to like this answer, Ken, but the problem is I fall in love with my shows. You know what it’s like when you first start dating someone, you don’t notice that tattoo, so sometimes when I’m in rehearsal – not sometimes, all the time – I fall in love. Jonathan Kent, with whom I just did Long Day’s Journey Into Night directed Man of La Mancha which I did with him. I was the associate director on that one and so we were sitting together in a rehearsal hall and Brian Stokes Mitchell was the star – he came in and he had a new take on The Impossible Dream, you know, that old song that everybody knows. He sang the song and it was so moving and so original I completely burst into tears and Jonathan Kent said “Hey, you’re supposed to be objective,” and I said “I’m here to fall in love,” and that is true. I think I fall in love with my shows. Later on, I may look back on a show and say “Whoa, I fell in love with the wrong girl,” or “How come I didn’t see she was so ugly?,” you know, but I never do it when it’s happening – I have to love my shows.

Ken: Could you work on a show that you were not in love with?

Peter: I never have. I don’t know the answer to that. Listen, you know my career, I’ve done a lot of flops in my life too. I love them all. I did a show called Copperfield back in the ’80s that closed, I think, in ten days or something like that and my grandmother was the only person besides me who loved that show. I loved it when I was doing it; I can’t help myself.

Ken: Okay, so you’re a director as well and there was a time when the path to directing always led through a stage manager, or very famously did for some folk, like Hal Prince started that way. Why do you think stage managers make very good directors?

Peter: It’s a fine question and almost unanswerable, because you know George Abbott, famously, was also a stage manager. I’m not so sure it’s true anymore, for one thing, because the English influence has come over to this country heavily and, as you know, in England, stage managers are thought of as crew and are treated as crew so I think that any English influence here would almost never allow a stage manager to become a director. I mean I did work for Cameron as an associate director and in fact I have directed some stuff for Cameron but it’s highly unusual that that happens these days. I think also the American system – I wrote this book about stage management and the reason I wrote the book was my perspective is an American perspective which is that the stage manager controls and is responsible for everything upstage of the proscenium arch. You know me, I’m famously sometimes combative about that, to make sure that I can represent everything upstage – technically, artistically and also the welfare of the company – I really believe that should happen. In the old American system, when there were fewer people doing things, the stage manager naturally put in all the understudies, naturally directed the national tours and just naturally moved into directing. I think it’s not true anymore; I think associate directors now are mostly the path to directing. Many schools that teach stage management do not allow stage managers to take directing courses. There’s a separation that’s happening in the academic world but is also, I think, happening because of the English influence over here. I think it is not so much a path anymore and I have to say, I know about myself – I told you I have an MFA in directing – and for myself, I’m a better stage manager than I am a director and I know that about myself, so I feel more anxious when I’m directing because I don’t feel the confidence I feel as a stage manager. As a stage manager – you know me, Ken – I’m completely, ridiculously confident in what I do. I don’t feel that as a director. I can do it, and mostly I enjoy it. Remember Dorothy Parker was asked once “Do you like to write?” and she said “No, I like to have written.” That’s what I feel about directing. Do I like to direct? Not so much. I like to have directed.

Ken: That self-awareness, I think, is very important. I know so many people that aren’t that self-aware about things that they do and it prevents them from moving forward in the other thing that they are so great at. This is a two-part question – you’ve worked on a lot of shows as a stage manager. From the stage manager perspective, what has changed the most in the last couple of decades?

Peter: I can really answer that question. So I grew up in the era of Manny Azenberg, Mike Nichols, Gene Saks, later Cameron Mackintosh – rough customers, in the best sense of the word. Let me use Manny as an example – everybody knows Emanuel Azenberg – Manny had a group of people – Artie Siccardi was one, Pete Feller was one, his directors were Mike Nichols, Gene Saks, those guys and Leonard Soloway was the general manager. We would get into a room and slug it out in terms of what the show should be, what the talent should be, how much time we needed, how much money we needed, and everybody was allowed to have a firmly, and I want to say loudly, held opinion. Then Manny would say “Okay, I’ve heard everybody. This is what we’re going to do.” I love that way of working and I never felt unheard, I never felt that there were things unexpressed that I had to say and I believe it’s a great way of working. I think we live in an era of nice now, in which firmly and certainly loudly held opinions are not welcome. That is, I’ve had to cut back my opinions, and I know you find that hard to believe but I’ve had to cut back my opinion expressing in recent years. I did Shrek which was produced by DreamWorks and I learned a lot – I did a lot of reading after that – because it was a hard experience for me, and I think probably for them too. It was a hard experience because I expressed myself forcefully and I did readings on corporations and corporate executives are meant to tow the corporate line – that is there’s a corporate line and you are meant to espouse that corporate line – almost any book you read on corporations will tell you that, and I think I was viewed as a corporate executive on Shrek because I was employed by DreamWorks and when I would say things that were counter to what DreamWorks might have wanted, because I wanted to express my opinion, whatever it was, it wasn’t particularly welcome. I think this was my fault and not theirs; I didn’t understand the environment I was in. They’re very smart guys, DreamWorks, I just think I expressed myself incorrectly on that show and so I’ve learned. I think every five years our business changes almost entirely – you know this better than anybody, Ken, you are changing it – and I think I’ve got to change with the business if I want to stay in the business and that’s what I’m trying to do.

Ken: Another very self-aware comment, I love it. I want your opinions, though – I want you to be opinionated! So now I’ve asked you, from the stage management perspective and your personal perspective, how the business has changed, but now stand back – you’re not employed by DreamWorks or any corporation right now on this podcast – how has the business changed as a whole? What’s the biggest change you’ve seen, for better or worse?

Peter: I think you said it correctly in the Times recently. We were talking about the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, I think that’s what’s happening in the country too. Listen, in the ’80s, Jim Woolley, who was my assistant on God knows how many shows, I think I’ve lost count, but Jim Woolley and I did two flops a year all through the ’80s. Almost all the shows I did were under $1 million – I know that inflation has changed all of that – but shows would come and go and they would close quickly as well. There are a number of shows that are currently running right now that, we all read Variety, we know what the grosses are on these shows, we know how much money they’re losing but yet they continue to run. One of the reasons I’m happy – I have to tell you, I’m blowing a little smoke here, but as a producer you have to know what you’re doing and there are very few producers, because most producers, as you well know, are investors now, who aren’t professionals in what they do – what they want to do is invest in something in the same way they might invest in a shoe company or something like that. So what has changed for me is the hands-on sense of keeping a lid on the money that is spent on a show because most producers don’t read ground plans anymore, they don’t read a light plot, so they don’t really know what they’re spending, they don’t know what they’re getting into, but there is a sense of very few professionals producing, directing, stage managing shows that we all know how to do. That has slightly gone away in favor of a lot of people who are not full time professionals in the theatre doing them. I don’t know if that’s a clear answer or not, Ken. I don’t think that was a very clear answer. Ask me again!

Ken: Well it included a compliment to me so I’ll take it – I think it was a very clear answer, thank you for that! What about technology in the theatre? Obviously, working on some of these giant shows – you put a helicopter on stage – how do you think that has changed over the last couple of decades and is that better for the theatre, do you like where technology is going?

Peter: I think all of that stuff, any kind of progress, is good for the theatre – technological, artistic, whatever it is. As a stage manager, these things are really interesting. When I did Sunset Boulevard, that was 1993, that was, at the time, the biggest show ever done, and then when I did Shrek, what was that, five years ago? That was the biggest show ever done. We invented technology for those shows. That is really interesting, Ken, as a stage manager. Nobody’s ever done it – nobody ever flew a 35,000 lb. piece of scenery before Sunset Boulevard, nobody had ever tried to do three non-concentric turntables on deck before Shrek. Figuring that stuff out is so interesting so I’m pro-technology, all the way. I think it’s really enjoyable for me as a stage manager. As a producer, if I were thinking like a producer, I would want to think twice about it. You can get very involved in the technology and is it really serving the play? I mean are you telling the story well with the technology that you’re bringing into it? And sometimes the technology is for its own end and I think that is not a good thing for the theatre. Listen, we’re all in the service of telling a story – that’s all we do; we have no other function – and Mike Nichols used to say “Everyone serves the play. The producer, the playwright, everybody serves that idea, and if you can’t serve that idea, get out of the way.” I think that sometimes we get so involved in technology, in it being interesting on its own, that it gets in the way of the play itself. The play that I’m doing right now – I’m doing Long Day’s Journey Into Night, one of the greatest American plays, if not the greatest American play, ever written – with a cast that you can’t beat with a stick, they are all wonderful people, and a very well-directed production. We have fog in the show and the fog, it runs all the way through the fourth act and a lot of the third act and you can see it upstage in the windows. It’s very well done; it’s beautifully done and beautifully lighted by Natasha Katz. I wonder sometimes; I find myself sometimes being distracted by the fog and I wonder anything that takes away from the words that are being said, Emile’s words, and the acting that is being done by these people is not a good idea for me. So it’s an open question whether that fog is such a good idea or not. It’s beautiful but does it help the play? I don’t know, and I’m not the right one to answer that question. So I like technology, I like figuring things out. I’m a production guy – that’s what I do – but I just want to make sure that it serves the play itself.

Ken: One of the stage manager’s jobs or duties is to make sure that the backstage environment is always a positive one, that the play happens artistically, socially, all of those things, and often on your shows you’ve had big, big stars that you’ve had to deal with. What’s it like when there’s a star backstage, a giant Hollywood star, a Glenn Close on Sunset or a Bernadette or Jessica now – how do you make sure that that environment stays stable?

Peter: I have to say they’re at the very top of show business – and all those people you just mentioned are at the very top of their game – they’re all great. It’s only sometimes the second-level people – you know, you go down a tier – they’re trouble because they want to somehow flex muscles they don’t have. Colleen Dewhurst and Zoe Caldwell brought me into the Broadway environment – without those two women I would not have a career – and they taught me how to behave in the theatre and they taught me how to, not instruct, that’s too strong a word, but encourage others to behave. So I’ve worked with truly great stars and they’ve all behaved beautifully every time. Bernadette, as you well know, you can’t find a better human being on the planet than Bernadette Peters. You know, she sponsors animal rescues, she does Broadway Barks which I do every year with her. They’re all great. Jessica, I had Jessica Lang, I had no idea what to expect from a big movie star who basically is less known for theatre than she is for films. She’s great in every way. We talk every night, she has no star attitude at all, she only wants to do the work, that’s all she cares about. Michael Shannon, John Gallagher, Gabriel Byrne, one of the funniest people I’ve ever met. They’re all wonderful to work with. All they want to do is the work, they don’t care about being stars. Glenn Close, really a big movie star as well as a big Broadway star, heaven to work with. Heaven. I’m just in touch with her now because she just did Sunset again as a concert over in London, she’s going to bring it over here, I’ve just been in touch with her because I can’t wait to see it again and to see her do the performance. I’ve had trouble with sort of second tier stars and usually the way I handle it is just the way you would handle it too – you simply go to them and say “This is the effect it’s having on the show. Is this the effect you want it to have?” and I don’t know how else to do it but to put it in their laps and say “This is what’s going on.”

Ken: How do you think Broadway is doing artistically, compared to other years you’ve been in the business? Or let me ask you – I’m going to start a brand new question, it’s called my Groundhog Day question – if you could live any Broadway year over and over, again and again, what year would it be?

Peter: Oh my God, Ken. That’s a really fine question. Do you mean my own Broadway year or the year of Broadway?

Ken: The year of Broadway. Basically what year of your life was the best Broadway year you can remember?

Peter: I would have to say 1976 would have to be it because that was the year of A Chorus Line and Chicago. I hadn’t done a Broadway show at that point – I didn’t do my first Broadway show until the next year – but to have A Chorus Line and Chicago, and Chicago was, as you remember, subsumed by A Chorus Line. I saw Chicago three or four times, the original production, because everyone had heard of it. It had Chita Rivera in it, do you know what I mean? And then I worked with Stan Lebowski – remember? “5, 6, 7, 8!” Stan Lebowski. Those shows changed my life, but also, if you look at a year like 1969, I think it was, I was living in Hawaii, I was teaching at the University of Hawaii then, and I would fly into New York from Hawaii and see shows but that was the year I saw Company for the first time. I saw Company and Borstal Boy by Brendan Behan on the same day. It’s hard to say. You know what, Ken? The year that I’m living in is always the best year. This is the year of Hamilton. This is the year of Hamilton! It’s going to change the world, Hamilton. The artists are in charge again. Lin-Manuel Miranda, there is no better person to lead the theatre and the world, as far as I’m concerned. He really means it. He’s really smart, he’s really talented and he’s one of the nicest guys you’ll ever meet too.

Ken: I want to go back to this idea of you, because you’re such a production guy and you’ve witnessed so many major shows – big successes and also some big flops – coming together. If I needed a diagnosis of how a musical was going I would call you. If there was one thing, one element that you could point to of being the most important part of making sure a musical is a success, what would it be? Would you point to the book, would you point to the costumes, would you point to the star?

Peter: Well famously, Garth Drabinsky, years ago, did an interview in the New York Times in which he said he had figured out the way in which every show that he would do would be a hit, he had figured out how to do musicals, and he never had a hit again. Listen, you know better that anybody, Ken, that chemistry, that somehow about the chemistry of the room – and I would be the wrong person for you to call because I would be in love with the show that I was doing so I would say “It’s great, I’m loving it! Oh my God, it’s the best thing I’ve ever done!” So I would be the wrong person in that way but you look at, like Mike Nichols, in my lifetime the best director ever, he’s done some terrible shows. I did Country Girl with him, which was not a good production, with wonderful people in it. There were terrific people in it, a great script and Mike Nichols directing. Sometimes things simply go wrong for reasons you can’t imagine. I did The Goodbye Girl. The Goodbye Girl – Gene Saks directing, Marvin Hamlisch, David Zippel, Neil Simon, Manny Azenberg, Bernadette Peters and Marty Short – a slam dunk.

Ken: I bought a ticket, I think it’s the only time – I was in college at the time and I saw the full page New York Times ad and all those names that you just rattled off, I was like “How can this not be the biggest hit of all time! I’m buying a front row ticket for a preview!” and literally it was the first time I had ever seen a Broadway show where I was like “I… I don’t think that was so good… What’s wrong?”

Peter: Yeah, the chemistry never happened. The chemistry happened between Bernadette and Marty but in hindsight I almost always know what went wrong. On that one it was an idea that was past its time. It was about a woman who only wanted to get married and we did it in 1991 but nobody wanted to hear that story anymore. They wanted to hear it in 1975 or whenever the movie came out; they didn’t want to hear it in 1991. Anyhow, I know in retrospect but at the time I had no idea. That production was famously a mess too – things went wrong in that show that were pretty ugly – but I don’t know, if you knew, Ken, every show that you produced would be not only a huge hit but also an artistic hit, from your perspective. Nobody knows, that’s the great thing about the theatre, is that nobody knows what it’s going to be. Hamilton? What a dumb idea. A musical about Alexander Hamilton in rap?

Ken: I want to do a sketch were Lin-Manuel is pitching that to producers as an unknown, like “I want to do this thing and it’s rap music and founding fathers but none of them are white,” to see how that would go over.

Peter: I did a show with him as an actor. We did the Encores version of Merrily We Roll Along, he was Charley Kringas in that, and he was talking about it then. He had already done a couple of concerts just singing several songs from it and he would say “I know this is a dumb idea but this is what I’m doing. I know it’s a dumb idea.” He worked on it for, I think, eight years.

Ken: What I love about that and what we do here is that if he was in Hollywood and had pitched that idea in Hollywood he would have been kicked out of every studio in town.

Peter: That’s right.

Ken: But on Broadway that kind of idea can be done. It’s what I love about it.

Peter: Years ago, Michael Eisner – remember him, who ran Disney? Where is he now?

Ken: Counting his money.

Peter: He came to Manny Azenberg and said he wanted Manny to produce plays and he, Michael Eisner, would bring an idea to Manny and Manny would then hire the people to write that thing and Manny said “It doesn’t work that way in the theatre because there has to be,” and Manny used these words, “an artistic impulse.” And Eisner famously thought Manny was an idiot for saying that but Manny said “It has to come from something the writers want to write about.”

Ken: That is so right. I’m kind of an idea guy and I come up with ideas for shows and plays and I have, on many occasion, talked to playwrights who I know and they’re like “Ken, that’s a really good idea. I can’t write that. It’s not my idea. I can’t get into it.” Ken Ludwig said to me “I only write my own ideas because I need that artistic impulse.”

Peter: Yeah, absolutely, and that’s why – you’re asking about can you tell when a show is in production whether it’s going right or wrong – the answer is no because all the impulses have to be right and when all the impulses are right it’s magical beyond belief. I mean you know, when you see a show, you’re a producer on Spring Awakening, right? Spring Awakening was great, it was a great revival – and I loved the original, I saw the original three times – I saw your revival twice and I loved it and I thought, because Michael Arden, wasn’t he the director? He had the right impulse. Somehow the way in which he told that story, and Spencer Liff, am I getting that right? Good, right? They had the right impulse for telling that story and they had the right impulse. The way you guys ended that musical was brilliant. I thought it was an entirely new way of thinking about the end of that and I cried like a baby when I saw it. All the impulses were right on that show, I thought, every one of them, I thought every performance was right but somehow it all came together in a ground swell to make something which was really important.

Ken: Advice to young people getting into the business, people that want to be drama critics?

Peter: Drama critics, oh God.

Ken: People that want to be stage managers or just get into the business in general. You have a great perspective, overall, on what it takes to work here.

Peter: Just do it. Whatever it is, just do it. When I came to New York and I was thinking maybe I should be a director, people said “Oh, just rent a space and just direct something. Just direct something,” and if you believe you can do something just go ahead and do it. That’s the only way. I still write some criticism once in a while just to keep my hand in because I enjoy it and I also enjoy figuring out what I actually think about something and being able to say it succinctly. But I think that’s the only advice there is. I give advice to a lot of stage managers and some directors who want to get into the business and all of it is just find a place and just do it, just do your job.

Ken: Okay, my last question, which is my other James Lipton-like question. It’s called my Genie Question – I want you to imagine that the genie from Aladdin comes to pay you a visit and says “Peter, I want to thank you for your contributions to the theatre. I’m going to give you something ever more valuable than that Tony Award you got for it; I’m going to give you one wish.” What’s the one thing that drives you so crazy, that gets you so mad about Broadway, that keeps you up at night, that makes you pound a table, that makes you want to scream and yell? The one thing – and only one – that you’d want this genie to wish away?

Peter: Okay, I actually know the answer but I think you’re not going to like it because you’re a producer. I think investment in the theatre is not only monetary. I’ve written a whole proposal to Actors’ Equity that they’re roundly ignoring right now about the lab contract – it’s one of the things that makes me berserk in our business. I’ve been working on a musical of Bull Durham which I really believe in, I really like this show and I’ve bene working on it for six years, and it’s like $100 a week here, or the lab contract is $1,200 a week, but it’s not much and it’s short term. All the actors who have done this show have contributed mightily to the shape, the direction, the music, the idea behind this. I’ve done many, many not only readings but labs – I did the labs of Rocky and then I didn’t get the show of Rocky and there is nothing, there is nothing for it. The actors who contributed, the stage managers, even design ideas that come in, these are all investments in the theatre and my proposal to Actors’ Equity is that everything be based on a royalty. Remember the old workshop royalty of 1%? I’m not going to bore you or the podcast right now with the percentage breakdowns but I think that once you, as an artist or a craftsman of any sort, are involved in a show, you are there for contributing and investing in that show and I think that you have a right to a piece of it if it goes on – a tiny piece, not a huge piece, but some piece of it that acknowledges that you have made a contribution to that thing. So I find now there’s a lot of cynicism from actors and stage managers – any Actors’ Equity member – about doing 29-hour readings, two-week staged readings or labs because everybody says “Well, they’re going to hire a star, they’re going to hire somebody else when it happens,” and they’ve written lines as they go, they’ve shaped the entire thing. So the thing that I would wish is that, as a community, that we would recognize that investment is not only monetary. You know – what is it? 20% or something of shows pay off. Or is it 25%? Some low percentage pays off, so the chances of anything happening are remote. This isn’t so much about the money, this is more about we’re all involved in the same project and everybody has a contribution to make. Some people contribute money, some people contribute craft, some people contribute their artistry to the show and I would wish that our business would rethink what investment means.

Ken: It’s a fascinating idea, first of all, and something that I am actually very open to. I love that idea of allowing people to participate, I think it gets them more vested in, hopefully, the success of the project and willing to do more.

Peter: I also think even scale can come down. I think it’s all about “Let’s invest. If the show fails, we all fail. If the show succeeds, we all succeed.”

Ken: It’s a fascinating debate that is going to be, I think, at the forefront of discussion over the next year or so as the Hamilton situation continues to be resolved. Thank you for doing this podcast

Peter: Thank you. It was great to see you too and congratulations to you. Your career is really, really going beautifully.

Ken: Thank you very much. Plug the book for us. What’s the name of the book?

Peter: Well it’s a boring title. I wanted to call it Go! or something punchy like that. My publisher said “No, it has to be Google-able,” so it’s called Production Stage Management for Broadway. I start snoring when I say the title but it’s Google-able and it’s on Amazon too – Production Stage Management for Broadway, Peter Lawrence.

Ken: Got it. We’ll include a link to it in the blog about the podcast. Thank you so much. Thank you, all of you, for listening – we’ll see you next time!

Tags:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

SIGN UP BELOW TO NEVER MISS A BLOG

X