favorited this one, guy

xdvdsfvd fdgsd
fdsaiuwa dfgdsgfs

Lucas — Take a look at this: http://www.bioteams.com/2005/04/06/bioteaminga_manifesto_for.html

Do you think that a geographically dispersed team could create together? I’m very intrigued by the possibilities of the new collaborative applications being called Web 2.0 — blogs, wikis, podcasts and Skype, social bookmarking.

Sure, but I am not at all discounting local work. That is part of why the indie-touring circuit idea floated by Clancey is so intriguiging. It makes it desireable to work locally, but gives incentives to bring that work to national attention.

At the same time there is a difference between art and jobs. If the issue is losing jobs locally I can buy that, but I think it is a different issue than creating art. Good work will be relevant regardless of who makes it or where it originates.

Josh here. LiveJournal won’t let me post other than anonymously.

Just a reminder not to discount the local angle. Much of the time, large regional theaters that bring in people from across the country do so at the expense of local talent. Cross-pollination is great, but so is theatre created by and for people from the same community. It doesn’t need to be one or the other, of course — like so many things, it’s all about the balance. Shows that discount the local angle often end up feeling disconnected and lacking in specificity. At least in my opinion.

Excellent post, Lucas — see my response: http://theatreideas.blogspot.com/2006/06/global-and-local.html#links