i believe that in order to preserve the attraction of community theatre that there needs to be a screening process held by all when someone DECIDES they want to direct .It appears that anyone in theatre who has done a show or many shows thinks that they can direct .we need to adopt a process at each community level that weeds out those that have no business trying to direct . any thoughts from anyone .

This probably needs attention from the specific group itself but any thoughts would be appreciated .

We have what is essentially a director training program in place at our theater. The first step a member takes to being a director is gaining experience in onstage work, backstage work, and lights and sound -- acting, crew or stage manager, and lighting assistant.  An important point is that all backstage, lighting, and AD training must be done at our theater -- the candidate needs to demonstrate not only an understanding of our procedures, needs and capabilities, but also, and most importantly, a commitment to our group. This has ticked some people off who have blown in with all sorts of credentials --  usually a lot of onstage experience and directing duties elsewhere -- who find out they're expected to do backstage work in order to direct, but we have found through experience that it's not in our best interests to turn over the keys to our building and total responsibility for a show to someone who hasn't demonstrated a willingness to take on any duties other than the "glamour jobs" of acting and directing. Folks who are serious about their craft understand why we do it this way. We have one member with extensive NYC theater training and professional credits on his resume who gave it all up and moved here from New York a couple of years ago; he's been onstage for us for a couple of seasons now, would like to eventually direct, and is enthusiastically taking on backstage jobs toward that end. He's been surprised to find out that working a show from behind the scenes is not only important and valued work, but fun, too!

Once they've they've put in their backstage work, a candidate is eligible to work as an assistant director to an experienced director. They put out the word that they're ready to AD and wait for someone to ask them to take on the job, or they approach a director they'd like to work with and ask them outright if they can AD. Some folks wait quite a while before getting their chance to AD, if we have a number of eligible folks on board. During the time that they're waiting for an AD spot to open, they're expected to continue to work with us in a variety of capacities.

Most people work as an AD on at least two shows before they feel they're ready to direct. When they apply to direct, the board must be satisfied -- based on informal reports from the directors for whom they've AD'd - that the candidate is ready to take on a show; if they're not, it's suggested that they continue to AD in the hopes that they learn enough to eventually take on a show on their own.  Even when the board finds them qualified and gives them a show, we don't let them dangle -- for their first directing gig, they must work with a "consulting director" for their AD, that is, someone who's been through the same training process and has directed two or more shows at our theater. Once they begin to direct with us, they must continue to be active members by taking on some other job -- acting, crew, serving on the board, whatever -- during seasons when they they're not directing a show.

Some AD's never take the final step of applying to direct; they realize after helping a director from auditions through final curtain that they're really happier just being onstage or backstage. Often the total responsibility of the whole shebang turns out to be more than they are comfortable with, or they realize that they don't have the creativity to come up with ideas for blocking, business, or character direction. So this program also gives us a stable of experienced assistant directors, as well as a number of "home-grown directors."

I'd say the program has been successful -- we have enough directors now that most of our directors only take on one show every other year, although some may direct two seasons in a row if we need them to, or if they're really nuts . We're currently in rehearsal for "Noises Off," and in a cast of nine, seven of us are not only actors, but also full-fledged directors in our own right. Fortunately, the eighth director on board for this one -- the one who's actually sitting out in the house directing the show -- has been with us a long time, worked with all of us at one time or another, often in a training capacity, and is not the least bit intimidated at the idea of having to direct seven other experienced directors!

A truly worthy topic of discussion.  This is not to say that all topic are not worthy, just that this topic is of considerable interest to me.

When I was a young man in college I took a theater course in Play Directing.  This was a required course for all theater majors.  Prior to this course, I had changed my major from Broadcasting to Theater, and continued my minor in Broadcasting.

During my broadcasting studies, I took courses in Radio, Television and Film Production.  It was imperative that before I began a production, every detail need to identified, and implementation plans were to be addressed.  Every word in the script needed to be matched to physical movements by the talent, and technical directions for in the booth.  This was taken very seriously, and often resulted in multiple pages for very short segments.  For example, a 5 minute segment generally translated to 25 to thirty pages of technical directions.  Of course, as the subject matter became more free-form as in an interview, these technical script became smaller and smaller, and as skills were developed, this became an inate ability.

I worked very hard to develop these planning skills, and 12 years later, while teaching middle school students the art of Television Production, I was able to hand twenty 11 -14 year olds a shooting script for a 5 minute demonstration video, and they were able to follow the instructions well enough to produce a fairly competent instructional video on the making of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

I know this seems like a long way to make a point, but trust me, it is about to become very clear.

When I changed my major to Theater, I took this course in Play Directing, there were 16 students in the course.  We were instructed in all the basics of Play Directing, including staging, movement, stage directions, and most importantly "emphasis". (This should appeal to anyone who has allowed themselves to be upstaged, or had a director allow it to happen).  There was only one major catch to the course.  You could not pass the course unless you completed the semester by directing a one-act play of twenty minutes or less, and there were only 12 positions available.  This meant that four students would withdrawl from the course, or fail.  The only way your one-act play could be selected was if your director's book was approved.  Each student was given two opportunities to submit their director's book before the final withdrawl deadline to avoid failing the course. Long story short, only eight plays were selected.  Only two directors received an "A".  I was one of those student directors, and my Director's book was accepted on it's first offer.  This enabled me to cast my play and spend extra time working on characterization with my cast. 

This worked for me because of meticulous planning on my part, and I have yet to work with a director who did not come into an audition without a plan already laid out.  I retract that last statement, I worked with one director who did not enter with a plan, and if not for the exceptional cast and crew, the show would have been a disaster.

The moral here is that there are many people who believe they can direct a play.  Maybe they have been a stage manager on numerous occassions, but Directing should be viewed as planning and implementation.  If a director has a poor plan, they will more than likely fail.

We recently discussed this same issue at a board meeting with hopes of finding some new directors.  Our committee decision was a unanimous one, and we all agreed that no untested director would be permitted to stage a show without a Mentor (Producer) and without a director's book that spelled out the details of their plan for the show.  This book will contain a copy of the script, a rough floor plan, rough blocking ideas, rough costume ideas, and the director's interpretation of the script, and why.

In the end, it is all aobut entertaining your audience, and even though they come to the show knowing we are amateurs, the least we can do for them is not behave like amateurs.