The Royden B. Davis Performing Arts Center opened to great fanfare last semester after $30 million and a delay of several months. Students hoping to finally see their favorite student productions on a larger stage, however, are set for a sore disappointment.
The University’s administration envisions the Davis Center as a strictly “academic” building, which means that there will be no student productions without the “collaboration” of faculty members.
According to Program for the Performing Arts Administrative Officer Dorothy Biondi, the building will serve as the center of learning for the newly proposed theater major, as well as the current, more limited offering of a minor and small classes.
Biondi emphasized that any group is welcome to submit a proposal for a joint show with the theater program.
In public, student groups are quick to praise the idea of collaboration with faculty, and welcome the use of Davis’ practice rooms and set-making facilities. Mask and Bauble President Sami Ghazi (MSB ‘06) said that there was no cause to complain, and even that Mask and Bauble’s identity is happily tied to performing in Poulton Hall.
In private, however, several members of both student acting troupes said they were too intimidated by both the PPA and club leadership to criticize the rosy image of collaboration that has thus far been displayed by both sides.
Anna Johansson (CAS ‘06), a former board member of Mask and Bauble with a minor in theater, was one of the few people willing to publicly criticize both the faculty’s uncompromising position and what she described as a degree of passivity on the part of student groups.
She said that the faculty in the PPA was so concerned about publicly justifying theater at Georgetown and rapidly expanding its offerings that it threatened to undermine the well-established and rich tradition of student-led theater at Georgetown.
While student groups have indeed welcomed the use of new sets and costume-making facilities at the center, she said, the PPA’s actions have begun to take their toll on student theater. PPA faculty advisors to the groups have put indirect pressure on students to produce less shows each semester, including diverting student actors to the PPA’s own quickly expanding productions, and hiring professional actors to play key roles.
For Johansson at least, that close oversight by faculty in the direction and production of the plays has stifled one of the best opportunities for creativity and expression still available on campus.
“When [the] PPA puts on a show, we’re just like worker ants,” she said.
While the PPA’s desire to bring high-quality performances to campus should be applauded, this should not be done at the expense of the vibrant student theater culture that has existed at Georgetown for over 150 years. The new PAC has the potential to be a great boon for the university’s theater program, but if students are not allowed to continue their role in spearheading the growth of theater, a great opportunity will have been lost.
