What do you do when all your cross light gets hung two feet too far upstage? Rehang it in the correct place, right? Well, not if you are already at budget and a four to six hour work call is not possible. So you make do.
This happened on Becoming Adele. I tried to make it work. I changed a few easy to change things and lit the performer in a different way than I had originally intended. Its fine. I think it looks nice. It is not what I intended, but so it goes sometimes.
The theatre we are in is small enough that a few feet can really effect the whole design. The stage is far too dark downstage, certainly more than it should be. The result is an increased need for frontlight. The overall effect is a form that lacks the full molding and dimensionality that she deserves. Perhaps this is the kind of thing that only a lighting designer would notice, but it still bothers me. There are actually a few specific acting/blocking moments where this issue does become critical and actually impacts the experience of watching the performance. But that’s why we have previews! And notes calls!
The Theatre is so interdependent and when one link in the chain is stretched or broken it can effect a lot more than its own little world. I had to convince the director that he did not need to reblock the show, that our actor would be lit where she needs to be on stage. The frustrating thing about this is it is not a problem I caused. Really no one did. The architecture in the space is odd and one of the lighting pipes got missed when counting so the fifth pipe upstage got mistaken for the fourth. Really, all the lighting equipment is too far upstage, its just that since I was planning on lighting the show primarily via crosslight that it is of so much importance.
The crosslight looks like this when our performer steps downstage.

Deep shadows are cast on the face because the light is not forward enough to fill it in. The result is that I have to crank the frontlight way up to fill in. There is nothing wrong with this approach to lighting the performer, it is simply very different than I had intended. Dramaturgically it is not as strong a choice, but there is little to do. What I mean by that is that it weights the play more towards the presentational side and further from the naturalistic side of the text. Both valid choices, I happen to believe the latter is the stronger of the two.
Its frustrating because I keep watching the show and see these problems with the lighting and begin to kick myself for overlooking something, and then I remember what the problem is. And I have to remind myself, I did not draft the lights wrong, and while they were hung in the wrong place it is not really the fault of the electricians. The drawing I received of the space did not indicate this odd architectural issue that set off this whole fiasco.
I just hope that this is one of those issues that in the end is not noticeable by the audience. The work behind the play should be invisible. By that I mean the experience of watching the play should be effortless. One should not spend their time wondering “oh look honey she sure seems dark” unless of course that is the point. The audience should experience the play and all its emotions and journeys as the creative team intended, not as fate dictates.
We have a few notes to take care of before Monday’s preview that should clean the whole thing up. The problem will be solved, I just wish it had never been there in the first place. But then, as the Buddhists say “there’s always something.”