Introduction

In 1870, playbills did not credit a “director” or designate a work as being “staged by” someone. Yet, as we know, vast numbers of shows were mounted and, human nature being what it is, we cannot reasonably suppose that a group of artists and artisans, lacking a leader, would coalesce by itself into a satisfying performance and open on time. Even in 1870 someone had to cast, call the rehearsals, instruct the crews, interpret the play, and pace the production.

In 1945, playbills routinely named directors, whereas producers issued them with separate contracts. Reviewers knew, or believed they knew, what directors had contributed. Actors courted them, believing they could bestow stardom, or at least a job. Indeed, by 1945 some directors viewed themselves as seminal artists, using the labor of others as the raw material for fulfilling the grand vision of an auteur.

The evolution from anonymity to adulation, a slow process of reassembling variously assigned directorial tasks into a job description separable from other theatrical chores, is the subject of this chapter. The discussion will dwell on the participants in that evolution, sometimes examining their best-remembered work but more often their responses to economic, social, or technological changes that affected the production process. If plays of enduring value are not mentioned often, it is because, as George S. Kaufman put it tersely, “Good plays have a way of being well directed.” That is, they direct themselves. Conversely, a weak script needs very fine direction to make it work.