On the plus side, the building has things like all four walls and a level floor, so it may be feasible. We started with a facade study and some rough sketches...

This is the current facade which is in good condition. For those who haven't been in the Bailiwick recently, it's configured as follows:

• 1 150-seat mainstage, configured as a proscenium tucked into the corner.
• 1 75-99-seat studio with flexible seating
• 1 25-seat loft theatre up behind the mainstage.
• 1 shop / storage space

I'm not convinced that this is a viable arrangement for us, for the same challenges about keeping the building self-supporting that existed at the Edgewater space. We need a building that can house enough rental business so that the building is not dependent on our production revenues and vice-versa. The current arrangement of the Bailiwick does not translate into enough rentable space to cover costs. Market rental rates for the mainstage would be about $2200/week and for the studio would be about $1200 in its current condition. If we rent the spaces full time during a month, that comes to about $14,000/month which is not enough to cover staff, utilities and rent. Even assuming that there are no dead weeks in the rental schedule. I'm changing the family crest to "The building stays open and running even if Theatre Wit produces six twelve hour shows in a row about peanut farms that make $8.40 between them."

I also think that the city has plenty of 150-seat stages (three of them are available for rent at Theatre Building Chicago, our new next door neighbor). What we are dying for in town is nice 90-100 seat studio spaces with good fixtures, ample stage space and modern equipment. So, what if we remodel the space into some really nice 99 seat spaces instead? The architect came up with this concept sketch:

So, better. We get to keep the existing bathroom and shop which would keep the cost down, but how valuable is to to have a shop? Here is a lovely space which should be more working space. Would converting that space into a theatre be more or less profitable than renting out the shop space? Way more. So, back to the drawing board with the following instructions:

• The space must fit three studio theatres, ideally 99 seats, no smaller than 80 seats.
• We must have more bathroom space (more seats)
• All the spaces need to be on the first floor to deal with ADA restrictions, as I'm unlikely to buy an elevator

And next post, we'll see what we come up with...

The space lives!

Many remember (well, I remember) our previous effort to renovate a building in Edgewater to be a performance home for Theater Wit in 2006. An effort that ended in disaster, alas. After that attempt, we were back to square one, looking for space. My initial efforts to find a commercial realtor were met with failure as my previous realtor vanished from the face of the earth, leaving only 1 million other realtors in his place, all of whom were indifferent to the tiny pennies we were offering.

So, I sent out a pile of emails and faxes to commercial real estate developers and landlords describing what we wanted and what we could pay and settled back to wait.

Wait I did. It was very still and quiet where I was, except for the occasional soft song of a bluebird and the echo of derisive laughter floating over the trees from landlord town.

But in September of 2007, I decided to rent us a rehearsal space. We had a ton of stuff in storage, and four shows coming up, so I wanted a big ol' place to keep it all. And I found a lovely warehouse, slapped a stage and some sound baffling in and enjoyed a quality year of rehearsal in the nicest room I have ever been able to rehearse in, barring one evening when Steve snuck us two hours at the Goodman for a reading for W!

If you haven't rehearsed at the Goodman, I won't describe it, because it will make you all weepy, and this is a happy post.

But my new rehearsal space was super nifty and I loved it to bits. And my landlords, Spiros and Kiki owned a whole mess of property. I explained my space dliemma and they told me that they currently leased space to the Bailiwick and being the landlords of one theatre was enough.

"Fair enough, but would you keep your eyes open and let me know if you pick up anything I could help you develop," say I.

Eleven months later, I recieved a call from Kiki asking if we were interested in the Bailiwick space, as the Bailiwick had decided to vacate and go itinerant. We then banged out a lease (my fourth attempt, so I was getting good at it) in a few weeks and... bingo, new space!

I'm still totally boggled by the prospect and don't actually have a clear idea what we're going to to do it, but I'm sure I work it out in the next month or so.

So, yay! I called up David Zak after we agreed on the lease terms and we met at the theatre. He was quite cheerful and gracious about it, and has been tremendously helpful. I'm trying to get a sublet together so that the Bailiwick and their renters can finish out 2008 undisturbed now and I know he will do well (and be much happier) as an intinerent producer rather than a building operator.

I directed my first professional shows in Chicago at the Bailiwick and I have a lot of fond memories there. In many ways, I think this will feel like coming home.

The cards in play here include Francine, an unfaithful wife; her stolid but waspish husband; her hair-trigger lover, Fedot (pronounced like the playwright); the lover's innocent young wife; a drunken neighbor; and, in typical Feydeau fashion, a young man with a speech impediment. Jeremy Wechsler's astute staging for Theater Wit keeps the action in the late-19th Century, upper-middle-class Parisian world, and the set by Hang Le and Courtney O'Neill has the requisite doors for breathless slam-bang entrances and exits (even if a knob did fall off on opening night). Kevin Theis's swaggering arrogance and eventual humiliation as Fedot bring a certain disgraced New York governor to mind, and there are sterling turns by several supporting players, especially Ron Keaton as the bumbling drunkard and Matt Engle as a young swain tongue-tied in love.

But if one tends not to like farce on general principle, there isn't much in this show that would change that verdict. Skillfully played, elegantly costumed by Laura B. Kollar, and with a few sly contemporary touches, "Feydeau-Si-Deau" is undeniably delightful, but the delights tend to be short-lived.

Though we don't want to reveal too many of the particulars--the reveal of the who, what and with whom is what makes French farce worth watching--we can say this: The swinging partners in Feydeau-Si-Deau seem almost to advocate for open relationships. Working with a dream cast of comic actors, many of whom are afforded only a scene or two, Wechsler makes a decent case for Feydeau's brand of sex comedy with a lesser-known work (this adaptation, which premiered on Broadway in 1973, makes a belated Chicago debut).

Maggie Graham, an actor who seems genetically engineered for screwball, is a standout in the lead female role, while Matt Engle channels his intensity into painstakingly choreographed physical comedy (and Jennifer Grace makes something out of nearly nothing in a delightfully quirky, tiny role).

In this breathless adultery fest (originally titled Chemin de Fer), French turn-of-the-century playwright Georges Feydeau proves he's the Bach of the bedroom farce. When two stultifyingly bourgeois Parisian couples unwittingly trade partners, they become ensnared in a web of deception, mistaken identities, police inquiries, and random gunfire. Feydeau's clowns dance impishly on a precipice of moral ruin.... The production ultimately delivers satisfying mayhem.

Don't miss the inspired lunacy that Time Magazine extolled as raising the sex farce to the level of "dramatic genius." Chanal's wife Francine is the sweetest, most faithful spouse imaginable.

Well, the sweetest anyway.

In her search for excitement she gets her lover's clothes thrown through windows, incites a duel, cures stuttering and turns marriages upside down. It's Theater Wit's most madcap effort yet, by a master of the genre at the peak of his career. Starring some of Chicago's best comic performers, including Colin Blackard, Matt Engle, Jennifer Grace, Maggie Graham, Ron Keaton, Jordon Keller, Ian Knox, Robert McLean, Melissa Nedell, Ed Rutherford, Helen Sadler, John Stovkis, Kevin Theis, and Bret Tuomi. Directed by Theater Wit artistic director, Jeremy Wechsler.

Feydeau-Si-Deau is rife with sexual situations and comic nudity and may not be appropriate for younger viewers.

James Sroden took his 8-year-old grandson to the popular show in October of 2006 at the Briar Street Theatre in Chicago. But in the days after, he said he was bleeding from the nose, having nightmares and losing filings in his teeth after he said two blue men forced a camera down his throat.

In the lawsuit filed in Cook County Circuit Court, Srodon said the Blue Man Group actors used an "esophagus cam" to project an image of Srodon's mouth and throat onto a large screen for the audience's amusement.

The lawsuit alleges the Blue Man actors circled him, held his neck and arms and "forced his head back" to insert the camera.

"When I started struggling, it seemed like this fellow, he tried to be more aggressive with this device and shoved it way down my throat," Sroden said. "In the days after that, the nightmares continued. A few days later, I really panicked because I had blood coming from my nose."

Horrible, eh? Poor guy. Those wacky blue guys have finally gone too far! Sure, stuff each other with marshmallows, indulge your latex fetish, but stop assaulting the audience and shoving things down their throat! That's A.R. Gurney's provence.

But, one problem, according to the general manager:

"Essentially, we have a piece in the show where an actor holds a camera to an audience member's mouth, doesn't enter their mouth, and then we play a video," Kori Prior said. "We have been performing this show in this theater for 10 years and have never had this issue before."

Now, I am not a Blue Man, nor do I play one on TV, but basic sense will confirm that under no circumstances will actors be shoving objects down audience members' throats! It's hard enough to get them to get their parking validated.

In any event, Theater Wit's spurious lawsuits to date: 0

Our audience must love us.

Actually, it's part of my goal to start using the theater's web site as an actual tool instead of a burden to keep updated. Over three years ago, I converted the site into a moveable type blog to help with frequent updates. I have subsequently maintained and updated the software regularly. Of course, the one thing I haven't done is to... you know... actually use this technology to post content!

So, here are the New Year's Resolutions that Theater Wit and I made to each other over a bottle of Madiera (don't ask) at 1am on New Year's Eve:

1. Keep an artistic director blog. If you make an entry less than once I month, don't speak to yourself ever again.
2. Redesign the front page to something a little less neutral. I think the current layout is much cleaner than our old one, but is not particularly in the spirit of our endeavor.
3. Put the damn company history up on the site. We have a proud record which interested parties might want to review, but right now you can only access them by using the search function.
4. Activate the search function.
5. Start including a rehearsal and pre-production blog. While I think in some ways discussion of process is overrated, I think there are interesting aspects to the producing and directing process that will be of interest to at least six of seven of the millions of readers this new site will no doubt attract.
6. Bring other artistic collaborators of Theater Wit in for each show and encourage them to post articles as well.
7. Put actual show information on the site. Trivial details like "What's it about" often get short shrift on our pages.

Check out the full review.

I and the architect drew up some new plans for a new dual-story structure, with 17' ceilings in the performance spaces and a shop fully integrated with the backstage areas.  Two rehearsal spaces, a classroom, a bar.  We're going hog wild, just us and AutoCAD.  I contact the contractor to let him know about the delays, but sign a contract for the work.  Either he's doing the interior buildout for the new building or the complete renovation on the old strucuture.  I contact our sublessor to let them know about the delay.  And I settle back to wait.

Several things have to happen before we know which path we will pursue.  First off, the Landlord has to meet presell expectations for his condominiums next door to secure the second round of financing.  He has sold 10 units, he needs to sell 12 to achieve the magic banking number of 50%.  Subsequently, we need to get aldermanic and neighborhood approval for the buildout in September, three months to draft plans for permit and budgeting, then financing while the permits are submitted, construction to start in May of 2007.  I am concerned that this project is going to get much larger than I can handle.

We submit our preliminary drawings to the landlord's architect and wait for the zoning committee meeting.  I don't hear anything for a month or so, and am concerned that we will miss the meeting.  I arrange another meeting with the landlord. 

In his office, he says he has two more issues we need to discuss before moving ahead.  First and most important, the partnership has decided not to build the new building because of cost.  We will be renovating the existing space, as per our original plan.  I'm more relieved than disappointed since the issue of cost overruns was becoming a serious issue for me.  Besides, I'll be getting rent reimbursement for our spring production to make up for the planning delay.  

He also is concerned about the water supply.  As the restaurant tenant will be ready to move in by June, he will have to pave the courtyard and keep it open for the summer.  Therefore, we will not be able to have water brought to the construction site until October.  This will cause a three month slippage in our plans. I agree, with the caveat that we extend our free rent period to make up for the delay.

And when can we sign the original lease?  Thursday, the bank is reviewing it and he needs to get their approval for the financing for his portion of the build.  OK, I say, I'll see you Thursday.

Thursday comes and goes...  Friday... the weekend... I leave a message Monday.  Tuesday afternoon he calls back. 

We have a problem.

So, over the previous three years, the real estate market has been softening.  The bank is hesitant to finance his portion of our build out.  Only nine of the units have been pre-sold and the total financing he needs to complete the build out is causing the bank some concern.  Our lease has not eased their concern.  How, asks the bank, will this theatre put $500,000 into renovating it and how will they make it back?  (Answer: we don't)  Why would the lessor do this?  (Actually a complicated question.)  

But the real problem is not our lease, it's soft sales in the real estate market.  Banks over-loaned to developers and without the pre-sales, are reluctant to extend credit.  Buyers are moving much slower and the speculators which have been driving the housing market have pulled back.  Buyers are slower to move on a new development because of a current glut in the entry-level condominium market.

All fascinating to the real estate speculator, but I'm just a renter.  What do I care?

Amongst other issues facing the partnership, the bank won't lend the $250,000 the landlord has committed to in the draft of the lease. This, obviously, is a problem for me, as I then am nearly $350,000 short for the construction required.  What sort of rent consideration can he offer?  It will take six years of rent to cover the additional commitment, plus interest.  

Sadly, no.  The partnership would like to sell the property and get out, but can't do that with a rent abatement of such an extraordinary length.

Perhaps, offers the landlord, we would like to purchase the property ourselves?  He's worked up some numbers.  With "only" $400,000 down on a purchase price of $950,000, we'd start saving money in the fourth year of occupancy compared with the current lease. Maybe we could run a capital campaign before the holidays to raise it? I laugh and laugh.

I'm not interested in purchasing, since I can't build the building out and pay the down payment at the same time.  I did some math and countered with an offer for $200,000.  The situation is even worse as the softening real estate market has declined, interest rates have risen.  The rates now float around 8.25% for commercial loans.  To make up the down payment, the income-free term we were getting under rent abatement in our lease, the additional investment  and the interest costs, only allowed a purchase price of $200,000.  This is significantly under the market value of the land.  

The landlord countered with $700,000.  I returned with a figure of $205,000.  I checked with several banks to see what sort of loan I could establish.  They laughed and laughed, feeling that I would not make up my investment in the property.  No matter how many times I explained I didn't want to recoup the investment, they couldn't loan that quantity to a new arts organization with limited renewable assets.  I returned to the landlord and offered $210,000.  We stalled out.  

So, where do we stand?  As of today: No building. No lease.  No theatre. The landlord is looking for a group of people to go in on the building purchase (for the theater and restaurant space).  I hope he's successful.  Perhaps some speculators will appear that would like a long term tenant on the property so they can flip it in a decade.    Meanwhile, after consultation with the board, I'm back on the streets, looking for an alternate location.

As the landlord pointed out, had he but committed to the lease when we finished it a year ago, we wouldn't be in this predicament as the market had not yet weakened and loans to small developers not yet tightened.  Water under the bridge at this point.   I mainly feel foolish for having put so much hope in this one property.  As each new development occurred, resolution was just around the corner.  I've spent a considerable amount of money in planning and drafting costs, all of which might be pointless.  I have hit the streets again looking for a new property and we'll start again in the New Year.  Or maybe we'll be back in Edgewater with a newly invigorated owner and new partners.  All part of the fun.

Of the many decision trees I worked out, concern over rising interest rates and falling prices in the residential housing market were factors I never considered.  Damn butterflies.

I know anyone lucky enough to see Lance's performance will agree the award was well-deserved. It was a truly remarkable performance of a remarkable play. I was truly delighted to have worked with Lance on Will Eno's extraordinary text.

In the last couple of decades, comics fans have tended to divide into those who favor familiar superhero genre tales with their eye-popping typography and bright color palette and those who scorn men in tights in favor of graphic novels on dark, gritty themes.

Qui Nguyen's Men of Steel tosses that duality into the ring for an ultimate fighting championship between kitsch and art. The winner? Anyone lucky enough to catch Theater Wit's bold and breathtaking production of Nguyen's devilishly clever and disturbing parable.

Robert McLean's anguished Justice is outstanding as a man of extraordinary powers and all-too-ordinary emotional responses. David Roby as Bryant the Indestructible, a young man who feels no pain and hence allows others to re-enact their brutal revenge fantasies on him, is downright haunting.

But Nguyen has crafted something far more challenging than a brilliant send-up of superhero tropes...

Read the rest of the review to find out more or get your tickets today!