Andrew Lloyd Webber to Waive SCHOOL OF ROCK Fees for Schools Producing the Musical- Page 2

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 12/12/16 at 11:54pm

dramamama611 said: "...not everyone is as wealthy as is Sir Webber.  (or is it Sir Lloyd Webber?)   For those that CAN do it, it's lovely.

 

"

I just saw it in print the other day. It's actually "Lord Lloyd Andrew" (Lloyd Andrew together being his last name.) Which is a tongue twister, if you ask me. When he was on TV with Graham Norton, I think the latter just called him "Lord Andrew".

But I was surprised to learn ALW is actually a peer and can vote with the House of Lords, though he has only done so a few dozen times.

***

PThespian, I think the point here is just that the offer is not quite so generous as it seems, considering requirements are imposed that make the generosity available only to a smallish number of schools. FWIW, bass guitar is what all my singer friends learned when they had to play an instrument to get into a rock band; it's much easier than rock guitar, drums or synthesizers.

I do understand the requirement arises organically from the show's plot and characters, but perhaps more thought could be given to how smaller school programs could adjust. Other shows have done so.

[10086sunset]

Posted: 12/13/16 at 7:30am

Broadwayworld.com. the place where no good deed goes unpunished...

[kdogg36]

Posted: 12/13/16 at 9:51am

Gaveston, I suspect you mean "Lloyd Lloyd-Webber." :) Though his name didn't originally have the hyphen, it seems to be a requirement for his name as a peer, for some reason.

I don't have a link handy, but I do remember that one of his votes in the House of Lords was in favor of the marriage equality bill a few years ago.

[trentsketch]

Posted: 12/13/16 at 10:54am

As another theater educator, I have to back up dramamama here. It's wonderful that ALW is going to waive performance fees for a contemporary show. It's wonderful that schools are even allowed to license the show while it's playing on Broadway.

Do not confuse availability with feasibility. There are vocally taxing parts in School of Rock that already make it difficult to cast K-12 students in those roles. Add on the requirement that the instruments must be played by the very specific actors onstage and you're making a hard show to cast an even bigger challenge.

Music programs in school are not magical. You do not gain the ability to teach students how to proficiently play instruments not typically taught in orchestral/instrumental programs to be proficient on a Broadway musical score in the limited rehearsal period schools have to put on a production. Could children learn these parts in a two or three month period? Yes. Will they be able to balance eight hours of school, rehearsals for the play, and the necessary private music lessons to catch them up to speed to just take on the waived fees opportunity for School of Rock? Probably not. And the costs of paying for the extra staff and instruction time to get the students to that level easily outweighs the cost of licensing the show.

If you have students who can play these instruments and are right for these roles, then by all means, take advantage of the waived fees. Just be aware that the show is challenging without adding in the actors must play the assigned instruments requirement in the contract. The offer is generous for the comparatively small group of people who can take advantage of it.

In educational theater, it is common for actors to mime playing musical instruments onstage while the pit actually covers the part. You won't find too many productions of The Music Man with a working piano onstage for the music lesson/Goodnight, My Someone scene. Same with guitar playing Maria and Georg in Sound of Music. There is no restriction in those contracts to force you to cast actors who play piano or guitar in those roles, thus limiting the talent pool. School of Rock is a show about students learning to play music that could be performed much easier with students learning basic technique and faking the notes while the actual musicians play in the pit. Live musicians taking on the part will be better, but forcing the actors to play the instruments adds an extra burden on the production other shows do not require.

ALW has done wonderful things for arts education. That's not in question. Removing the licensing cost from the budget for schools doing School of Rock is generous. That's not in question, either. It's just how practical the offer is considering the restrictions on the material. And that's coming from another theater educator who looked into the specifics of mounting this show and realized it just wasn't feasible for the schools I work in because of the instrument restriction.

[freewilma]

Posted: 12/13/16 at 11:09am

dramamama611 said: "Districts are usually k-12....but their schedules don't match for rehearsals. and just having the age range at your disposal still doesn't mean  mean you'd  have actors that can play the parts AND the instruments.  

 I see more PA schools being able to pull it off then regular public or private schools.

I've actually seen TWO public school productions of this show in the past 6 weeks and both did a terrific job. Granted they are very large public schools (one is a secondary school which also houses middle schoolers) in a metro area. Having a larger talent pool in a well-known program definitely helps; as does knowing your core of actors who might audition.  I'm sure a performing arts school would do a great job as well.  

 

"