Writing a play with no experience in theatre

[Mike TV]

Hi.
I'm looking for advice from users that have experience in the area of playwriting.
I am interested in writing some plays. I have already wrote two drafts (They are very rough drafts), and I have some ideas for other plays.
However, I have no training or experience in the area of theatre other than going to see a number of plays every year. Would not having any experience in directing/stage management/acting be a major hinderence to writing for the stage?

All advice is welcome.

[MrFrankenstein]

Off the top of my head:
Just keep writing. The more you write, and the more plays you've seen, the better. Read some of the minimalist guys, Pinter comes to mind - where the dialog is so sparse, its almost nonexistent at times.
You want the audience to be thinking and making up their own minds about your characters - so play with what you reckon your audience is 'seeing,' at times - and then break their preconceptions. (For instance, purely as an example - if its a scene where it appears to be an old man and a young girl - how long can you hide the fact its father and daughter? DO you want to hide this fact? Its a game you can play as a writer constantly with your audience. It forces them to think a little, rather than sit and be spoonfed 'character information.'
Same kind of 'gameplaying' can happen throughout your script, where you make the audience think 'A' and then sideswipe 'em with 'B.'
Also, theatre isn't radio with pictures. If an audience can see something happening, there's no need to spell it out verbally. Ditto using characters names too much (if at all) - that's a big area where a lot of plays fall down, people keep using each other's names in dialog - when in reality, you may well chat with family or friend for an entire scene without using their name. Trust that an audience is as clever as you are and will stick with what you're doing and showing them. So create stuff for them as if they are your equals. If you wouldn't tolerate X, then why let your audience have to? Stage and audience are on equal footing - they're just watching a story unfold. Make it fun for yourself and them.

(I mention Pinter because of the fun he's having with rhythms and silences - even though his plays are deadly serious things. Same with Tom Stoppard. There's always a ghoulish sense of fun discernible behind the lines. You can 'feel' the writer playing with language, turning conversation into drum solo's and conflict, using syllables and pauses for rhythm and effect, like jazz improv.)

Also - think 'scenes' - where your characters discover (the situation they're in) or (their relationship to one another) - and more importantly, how soon you want the audience to know these things. Who everyone is, and/or 'why they are confined to the area on the stage in view of the audience.'
Sometimes its fun when the audience gets to feel 'more clever' than the characters. Or is cringing at the bad mistakes the character's making - perhaps in a social situation, etiquette etc. Theatre's wonderfully interactive in a true sense.

But step one is: have fun and just write the story, let the characters chatter and have the plot line interfere and overwhelm them and force them to respond to it (whatever the 'conflict' is that's getting in the way of your characters lives). Don't let an absence of formal training get in the way of your self esteem - or your stories. I was never trained in Drama, but have made a living from my plays being staged for a long time. Its about your stories, not about 'you' or any pieces of paper saying you're now officially 'allowed to be a playwright.' The play's the thing.
Had an Ivy league university stage my stuff last year, got surrounded by people far more 'educated' than I was - but they couldn't write the story I could. Same can happen with you. So don't let the absence of formal qualifications get in the way of the act of simply 'writing the script.' The script is all that matters to those choosing what plays to stage, not where you come from or your degrees.
my two cents worth :)

[Maryn]

Hi, Mike. Nice to meet you.

While I have very little experience writing plays, I have zero experience as a director, stage manager, or actor.

I do try to follow the guidelines for live performance, in that you don't want to script anything which is difficult to direct or stage, which means keeping sets small in number and simple in design requirements, no dazzling effects, using a small number of players, and avoiding anything else which might make production difficult or expensive. I try to do that while giving the actor something interesting to do other than say his/her lines. (As a fiction writer, that's hard for me, finding physical stuff for the actors to do.)

Among the first steps might be to locate contests in your area where the prize includes a script-in-hand performance or a table reading. Seeing actors work with your words adds a dimension you can't get any other way. also consider contests which are not local in which your entry fee gets you feedback whether you win or lose. Don't avoid colleges, religious organizations, or other groups you're not connected with, if you can write what they want.

You might consider starting with short plays. My regional theatre teams up with a local writing center for three play contests annually: Two Pages, Two Players; One Act (up to about 40 minutes); and Full Length, plus some for kids and teens. Some of the full length plays go into fully staged production at the theatre a year or two later, which is pretty cool.

Maryn, shaking hands

[MrFrankenstein]

@Maryn, great advice. Better than mine, I reckon. I got lost in the structural side of writing, as opposed to the practical real-world thing of 'crawl, walk, run' - and finding local outlets and ways to get to hear ones words out loud. My mistake :)

[SaraFMC]

Have you read Alan Ayckbourn's book, The Crafty Art of Playmaking? Excellent advice from someone who really knows what he's talking about.

[Mike TV]

Thanks for quick replies guys.
Plenty of food for thought.
I must check out that book too.

[Royal Mercury]

So find a little theater group and even if they offer you the part of a corpse, take it. There is a lot about making a play that is not observed from the outside and a lot about it that isn't about playwriting theory. It can only be learned by doing. It will enrich your plays and you'll probably make friends.

I'm not joking about the corpse bit. I had a friend in high school, he was small, and he enjoyed doing theater though he didn't like rehersing his lines, so he played corpses.

You want to write plays, why would you have any objections to being in them?

[KTC]

Hi Mike.

I'm the kind of guy who just jumps into things. Three years ago (almost to the day) I had a desire to write plays...but never acted on it. I responded to a call for playwrights to take part in a 24 hour play creation festival. I begged the organizers to take a chance with me, though I had never written a play before. For some unknown reason, they did. I got locked into a 19th century castle overnight (for 8 hours) and I was given a word prompt and told to write a 10 minute play. After the 8 hours were up, I was set free and the actors and director got locked into the castle for 8 hours to rehearse. After they were set free, an audience of 200 people converged on the castle and watched the play being performed.

Bam! I'm a playwright.

I did this last year too.

And I'm doing it this coming Thursday for the third time. I go into the castle at 10PM Thursday and they release me at 6AM Friday morning. The play will be performed Friday evening.

Why did I tell you this story?

Because what you do is say "I want to be a playwright". And THEN...here's the trick...YOU WRITE A PLAY. You can do it under duress...knowing that in 24 hours 200 people are going to be sitting in the audience watching your words come to life...or you can just simply sit down and write a play to write a play.

What I suggest---READ PLAYS. Get a feel for the formatting. READ, read and read...to see how your favourite playwrights work their dialogue. Listen to the rhythm of the dialogue...get the beat behind the words. And then...just write. Write, write, write.

Kevin, who is looking forward to his third year of incarceration!

[odocoileus]

Hi.
I'm looking for advice from users that have experience in the area of playwriting.
I am interested in writing some plays. I have already wrote two drafts (They are very rough drafts), and I have some ideas for other plays.
However, I have no training or experience in the area of theatre other than going to see a number of plays every year. Would not having any experience in directing/stage management/acting be a major hinderence to writing for the stage?

All advice is welcome.

Take some acting classes.

As a playwright, everything you write will be interpreted and/or performed by actors. Without an ongoing relationship to a community of actors, either within or outside of an academic context, your work won't be as good.

Uta Hagen's The Actor Prepares is also an excellent writing textbook, better than most of the writing advice books.

Weak grammar will also definitely count against you.

[ComicBent]

Of course, it would help to have experience with stage productions. But that is not necessary.

The key is to think in terms of the illusion of theater, which is one of its beauties. The action of the characters will flow naturally out of the plot.

So write away!

[Doug B]

Caught me in a philosophical mood today.

Knowledge of the theater is a great help. Things like scene changes and costume changes take time in the real world and there needs to be some basic understanding of the realities of the theater if you are going to be successful writing for it. Trying to cast a character who has three lines in act II is hard to do in a play but easy to do in the movies. Large casts are deal breakers at many theaters.

Now to the real issue: Does it help to be an actor or director to write plays? Actors and directors are different people than writers. Not to say that there not actors and directors who are good writers (Mamet, Durang and Firestein for example) but acting and directing are team sports where he result is due in part to many team members each doing their part. The team spends hundreds of hours working together with each person doing their specific job.

On the other hand, writing is a solo sport that requires the writer to spend hundreds, if not thousands, of hours sitting by them selves playing all the roles and doing everything themselves.

I am a theatrical producer, director, actor (in that order) I need to be around other people. If I spend two days by myself, I start to need to be around other people.

I'm also a not very prolific playwright. I don't like to spend a lot of time alone and that interferes with my writing. I lose track of what is going on and it takes me a long while to get back into writing mode.

I have a very good friend (and good playwright who has had several of his pieces produced) who likes being by himself and in very uncomfortable in a large group.

What I guess I'm trying to say is that people who like to be around people all the time gravitate to the acting and directing and people who would rather be alone gravitate to writing.

Just my two cents worth.

Doug

[Maryn]

Good post, Doug. (I'm delighted to have you here, can you tell?) Like a lot of writers I've known, I'm very much a solitary person, with a tendency toward shy. The idea of me taking an acting class which involves classroom performance, or playing a role onstage before an audience, is a lot like the idea of me bungee jumping. It might be loads of fun for some people, but it simply is not going to happen.

But I can sit alone in a room for days and days, perfectly happy. So there!

Maryn, who promised herself yard work but apparently lied

[Lavern08]

Once I get the inclination/inspiration to write a play, I start with telling the story.

I usually write it all out in a day or two, and then I go back after a week or so and tweak the dialogue.

Afterwards, I start to think about and add the technical stuff. ;)

[zander]

Honestly, if you're a shy person and prefer to work in solitude, playwriting might not be the right avenue for you.

A playwright, unlike a novelist or poet, must be a collaborator. You've got to be a social animal, because you have to work with directors, designers, and actors. You need to be able to communicate and compromise with people who are actually performing your play.

The best way to get a play produced is to go to your local theatres and meet people. Talk to the artistic director, strike up a friendship, and then send them your play.

Most playwrights began as actors; acting on stage gives you the insight into what works and what doesn't work, and provides you with knowledge about audience reactions to things. I learned a ton from my time as an actor that I continually use a writer.

So if you're really interested - go to your local theatre, meet the people, and even audition for a show. Besides - it's a lot of fun.

[KTC]

I only do short plays at the moment. I'm SHY and work alone. I have had 4 plays produced. For all 4, I wrote them in a few hours and watched them performed on stage in front of audiences 300+ the next night. I never said a single word to my actors or my directors. I introduced myself to them after I saw the plays...but nothing more than a hello and my compliments for their wonderful work. I'm sickeningly shy.

[Lavern08]

Wow, you really are shy. That's not a bad thing - My darling hubby is painfully shy too.

I suppose it's different for me, because I've also directed my plays.

But then again, I'm very outgoing. :D

[KTC]

I shadowed a director once, but I think I'm too shy to try it. I was hoping something would kick in and I would feel like doing it...but it just freaked me out. (-: My online persona does not match my in person persona.

[Maryn]

Honestly, if you're a shy person and prefer to work in solitude, playwriting might not be the right avenue for you.

A playwright, unlike a novelist or poet, must be a collaborator. You've got to be a social animal, because you have to work with directors, designers, and actors. You need to be able to communicate and compromise with people who are actually performing your play.

The best way to get a play produced is to go to your local theatres and meet people. Talk to the artistic director, strike up a friendship, and then send them your play.

Most playwrights began as actors; acting on stage gives you the insight into what works and what doesn't work, and provides you with knowledge about audience reactions to things. I learned a ton from my time as an actor that I continually use a writer.

So if you're really interested - go to your local theatre, meet the people, and even audition for a show. Besides - it's a lot of fun.I'm not trying to be all pissy (you'll know when I'm trying, honest), but I don't think this is true for many of us, although I don't doubt it's been true for you.

Like KTC, my works have been short, one of them produced, one placing high in a play contest. One of the original members of my long-time critique group was co-producer at a black-box theatre, and he was a shy, retiring man who could write for theatre but would never take the stage. Ever.

At AW, I've learned that this level of shyness is not at all uncommon in writers. It's been a source of amusement at every annual House of Love get-together--we have plenty of people say no, they're too shy to come, and those who do are scared until they realize 80 or 90% of us are just as shy.

Shyness can be a hindrance, and those who don't have it may be at an advantage, but a playwright who's also real shy can manage. For instance, I am able to talk to the director and actors, although it's not easy for me. I do it because I'm a professional and it's part of the job.

But schmoozing or auditioning at the local theatre is not going to work for me, or for KTC, or for lots of playwrights. Thank god it doesn't have to.

I've been a season subscriber to the local equity house for eons, and while I certainly can't cite statistics, it seems that most of the non-musical plays I've seen were by playwrights who were never actors but always writers. This season I've seen only one playwright whose bio mentioned amateur acting (Tom Dudzick).

So while the path of becoming a part of the local theatre scene is one approach which has worked, please, let's not assume it's the only approach which can work. Shy people can and do write for the stage.

Maryn, who's read one of KTC's plays and enjoyed it

[zander]

Undoubtedly there are shy people who never take the stage who've managed to have fine careers as playwrights.

I do think, however, that you have to be willing to jump in and work with people in order to get things right. The director and actors are going to have questions for you when they're rehearsing your show. You have to be able to connect with them.

Most playwrights are involved in the audition process for their plays as well - for a world premiere, I'll sit right next to the director and watch the actors audition. And that requires a bit of an outgoing nature as well.

But of course: It's not like there's only one way to do anything. It just helps.

[KTC]

Undoubtedly there are shy people who never take the stage who've managed to have fine careers as playwrights.

I do think, however, that you have to be willing to jump in and work with people in order to get things right. The director and actors are going to have questions for you when they're rehearsing your show. You have to be able to connect with them.

Most playwrights are involved in the audition process for their plays as well - for a world premiere, I'll sit right next to the director and watch the actors audition. And that requires a bit of an outgoing nature as well.

But of course: It's not like there's only one way to do anything. It just helps.

Bolding is mine. You are making absolute statements, so I am able to say that you are wrong without being wrong myself. I have had highly successful plays. Highly successful. I am not boasting when I say this. I've sat in the audience and watched as 300 people laughed until they were near tears. None of those 300 (including the directors and actors) even knew the writer was there. Like I said up-thread, I do not associate with the actors/director and I watch as they put on my play WORD FOR WORD and NUANCE FOR NUANCE. They get into my head and get every bit of the script exactly how I intentioned it, every time.

I was glad to read your final sentence in this post...so you are not unwilling to allow that shy introverts can also be successful in the world of playwriting. Trust me, I'm not the only successful shy playwright in the world. There are no absolutes. A good script will carry itself. A good script does NOT need a physical entity called the playwright.

[WriteKnight]

A good script needs to be created by the physical entity called the playwright. Short plays are quite different from longer pieces. Larger pieces might need to be 'reworked' after staging.

Is it possible for a playwright to write a full length script that is flawless, never rewritten, reworked or restaged after it has been completed? If so, I'm unaware of it. Most of this work is taken on by the director and producer. (Sometimes one in the same.) But why would a playwright not want to be associated with the act of staging a production.

Look - I'm primarily a screenwriter, but I've had success on the stage too. I've won awards for some of my short work - and seen a three act staged successfully AFTER I made changes to it while working with the director.

On the stage, the writers word is certainly more sacred than on the screen. No doubt about that. But getting that final polished script might take some work and colaboration - especially on longer pieces.

That's my experience.

[Lavern08]

... Like I said up-thread, I do not associate with the actors/director and I watch as they put on my play WORD FOR WORD and NUANCE FOR NUANCE. They get into my head and get every bit of the script exactly how I intentioned it, every time.

DANG!

Now that's impressive. :hi:

[Eumenides]

I think in writing the most important thing is to write. But my love for theater, or screenwriting, comes from the experience I've had as a viewer/reader. I can't conceive writing a play without being informed about its history, its medium, its possibilities, what's been done already. Until you know your medium inside out, how can you evaluate your work? How can you tread new paths?

[MrFrankenstein]

re knowing what's been done before is all very well, and yes its useful to have soaked up your intended medium's history. But ultimately, its about what your mind gives you as a story - you're only limited to your imagination. If you have stories to tell, they aren't defined by what has gone before, but by how unique and fresh your perspective is on the concepts and topics under discussion onstage. In short, don't worry about it.
Picture a dark landscape. That's the stage. Now what? Who comes on? Or what does the audience hear? Let your imagination fill in the three-dimensional canvas that a stage is. Approaching theatre from an academic viewpoint has its merits, but its not necessarily the only way of doing it.
I've have a large number of professional productions done of my work - and my inspiration has come from all kinds of things. I'm also not formally trained in Drama. I've never stopped to ask whether its the right way, or if Ibsen did it better. I simply sat down and began writing the story and let the characters run rampant and followed the narrative to its fitting end. Yes there is ancient history going all the way back to Greece and Rome involving theatre - and if you think you need to soak it up before doing your own thing, then so be it, that's what you have to do. But theatre is a very flexible animal. It'll accommodate your stories and allow you to branch out in your own unique way - and the ones judging will be those who're putting your work into a context, you as playwright are simply telling the story you want to tell.
Just be brave about it and do it, whichever way you want to go. If there's any analysis in the proceedings, it should be done by the playwright asking themselves why they're writing. And one you have the answer, regardless of whether the answer is 'money' or 'fame' or even simply 'to tell a cool story that no one else has' - then you get busy doing it, and ignore anything that blocks you from getting your work on stage in the way you want it seen.
/2 devalued cents worth :)

[lexxi]

Speaking as someone who has directed for the stage more than written...

I do try to follow the guidelines for live performance, in that you don't want to script anything which is difficult to direct or stage, which means keeping sets small in number and simple in design requirements, no dazzling effects, using a small number of players, and avoiding anything else which might make production difficult or expensive.

All true, in terms of making the script economically feasible to stage.

Just as advice for any beginning playwrights reading this thread: keep in mind that keeping the sets simple and the number of performers small does not necessarily mean that you have to limit the number of locations or the number of characters. Depending on the style of the performance, it's quite common in recent (as well as classical) drama for multiple locations to be suggested on stage without elaborate sets and for actors to play multiple roles in the same play.* So if the story you want to tell is more epic than domestic, it can be done on a budget. Just don't expect elaborately realized scenography.

*The same actor playing multiple roles at the same time is less common and will often come across as experimental, weird, and/or comic.

I try to do that while giving the actor something interesting to do other than say his/her lines. (As a fiction writer, that's hard for me, finding physical stuff for the actors to do.)

The best playwrights use physical action or visual imagery as well as dialogue to advance the plot. It's not always necessary for the playwright to come up with physical activities for the actors to perform during every conversation. But it's best to allow for the possibility of actors and directors coming up with stage movement throughout the scene. Set the scene in a location where there are reasons to move around and do things, even if it doesn't really matter to the plot exactly what those things are. Good actors will find things to do.

A scene that's all about people sitting at a table the whole time and not moving will get dull on stage pretty soon.

Stillness and just sitting might be effective in a climactic scene that follows a lot of physical activity and then focuses in to a quieter moment of truth. But preferably not for a whole play, even a one-act. Been there, done that, got bored.

[Lyla]

I cured my shyness by attending a stage acting workshop.
And that is what I'm suggesting shy people do. Just one workshop can completely change you and how you see yourself.

[MrFrankenstein]

re attending a stage acting workshop, that's a good suggestion. Also, for writers who've got no experience in theater (I think someone already mentioned it in this thread) Joining a local amateur-dramatic group will give you a bird's eye view of the basic structure of theater and who the important people are.
(Its often the stagehands and FX guys who have to be relied on to provide that essential car skidding noise in Act Two, or the props person readying the gun with blanks, to be used at the final moments of Act Three...) Seriously though, theater is like an iceberg, the actors are the tip and there's a quiet bustling army of people ensuring they're all where they should be and looking good. Joining a local theater production of anything will broaden your horizons and give you a great taste of both 'behind the scenes' as well as give you a sense of what is possible to conjure up on a stage in a way that an audience will believe it - without them knowing about the chaos at times behind the scenes...

[JennieRose8]

Off the top of my head:
Just keep writing. The more you write, and the more plays you've seen, the better. Read some of the minimalist guys, Pinter comes to mind - where the dialog is so sparse, its almost nonexistent at times.
You want the audience to be thinking and making up their own minds about your characters - so play with what you reckon your audience is 'seeing,' at times - and then break their preconceptions. (For instance, purely as an example - if its a scene where it appears to be an old man and a young girl - how long can you hide the fact its father and daughter? DO you want to hide this fact? Its a game you can play as a writer constantly with your audience. It forces them to think a little, rather than sit and be spoonfed 'character information.'
Same kind of 'gameplaying' can happen throughout your script, where you make the audience think 'A' and then sideswipe 'em with 'B.'
Also, theatre isn't radio with pictures. If an audience can see something happening, there's no need to spell it out verbally. Ditto using characters names too much (if at all) - that's a big area where a lot of plays fall down, people keep using each other's names in dialog - when in reality, you may well chat with family or friend for an entire scene without using their name. Trust that an audience is as clever as you are and will stick with what you're doing and showing them. So create stuff for them as if they are your equals. If you wouldn't tolerate X, then why let your audience have to? Stage and audience are on equal footing - they're just watching a story unfold. Make it fun for yourself and them.

(I mention Pinter because of the fun he's having with rhythms and silences - even though his plays are deadly serious things. Same with Tom Stoppard. There's always a ghoulish sense of fun discernible behind the lines. You can 'feel' the writer playing with language, turning conversation into drum solo's and conflict, using syllables and pauses for rhythm and effect, like jazz improv.)

Also - think 'scenes' - where your characters discover (the situation they're in) or (their relationship to one another) - and more importantly, how soon you want the audience to know these things. Who everyone is, and/or 'why they are confined to the area on the stage in view of the audience.'
Sometimes its fun when the audience gets to feel 'more clever' than the characters. Or is cringing at the bad mistakes the character's making - perhaps in a social situation, etiquette etc. Theatre's wonderfully interactive in a true sense.

But step one is: have fun and just write the story, let the characters chatter and have the plot line interfere and overwhelm them and force them to respond to it (whatever the 'conflict' is that's getting in the way of your characters lives). Don't let an absence of formal training get in the way of your self esteem - or your stories. I was never trained in Drama, but have made a living from my plays being staged for a long time. Its about your stories, not about 'you' or any pieces of paper saying you're now officially 'allowed to be a playwright.' The play's the thing.
Had an Ivy league university stage my stuff last year, got surrounded by people far more 'educated' than I was - but they couldn't write the story I could. Same can happen with you. So don't let the absence of formal qualifications get in the way of the act of simply 'writing the script.' The script is all that matters to those choosing what plays to stage, not where you come from or your degrees.
my two cents worth :)

I wrote a play in high school and am happy to say that I followed some of the "rules" you've dished out here. It was actually quite fun and I'm looking forward to writing another, when I can.

[Maryn]

I cured my shyness by attending a stage acting workshop.
And that is what I'm suggesting shy people do. Just one workshop can completely change you and how you see yourself.I don't mean to be rude or flippant, but if counseling and drugs can't 'cure' shyness, I doubt very much an acting workshop is going to do the trick. Otherwise, the doctors and psychologists who have treated me, my daughter, and my sister and her second child, would have simply sent us all to acting classes.

For those who are able and willing, and this helps, swell. (I bet it's fun, too.) But as Kevin and I stated adamantly earlier in this thread, don't assume that what works for you will work for those playwrights who are quite shy, or a different kind of shy, or just different.

I'm no more likely or able to perform in front of a class than I am to :censored in front of a class. It simply will not happen.

Maryn, quite impatient with people who think shyness can be easily overcome

[Eternal Stairmaster]

Recommended reading for any who wish to write a play: The Playwright's Guidebook by Stuart Spencer. It's been praised by several prominent playwrights, including Edward Albee. This is an extremely helpful resource, especially if you're trying to write without a theater geek's perspective. I find myself picking it up again whenever I have writer's block.

I think the most important thing any new playwright can do is read the essentials. Pinter is definitely on this list, but also take a look at the works of Tennessee Williams, Edward Albee, Samuel Beckett, and David Mamet. These writers have set the standard for what a play should be, and have created and broken so many rules it's not even funny. The book I mentioned also has a list of plays that should be read. It's really worth your time.

[Maryn]

Thanks for the recommendation, Eternal. I'll add it to my wish list.

Maryn, who wishes for much

[KTC]

Awesome! Thanks for the rec! I've never read any how to books...it would probably help this stumbling idiot to do so! ;-)

[Bloo]

I just stumbled upon this site and this particular subsite last night. But I'm going to go ahead and weigh in on the matter.

I'm a theater geek through and through but I'm also a writing geek through and through. I think both passions started about the same time. I can tell you the first play I saw (a musical version of the Wizard of Oz at the age of 5 that my dad was in). I've been involved in all aspects of the theater (actor, stage crew, director, fight choreography, and most recently playwright).

I'm not an outgoing person outside of the stage, I find it difficult to find and maintain friendships. I am a solitary person, which does help my writing. But when the lights come on, so do I. And I've seen it happen with others.

Do I think you need the same experiences I've had to be a playwright? No, absolutely not. I think it helps, but isn't neccassary. I've read pieces written by actors that are wonderfully written, with great ideas, but aren't right for the stage. What I think having some experience in the theater will help you with (even if it's just going to rehearsals and watching and listening to how actors and directors talk to each other) is the "guts" of the theater and it's jargon. You should know that actors never turn their backs to the audience unless neccassary. You should know what "cheat out" means, what "stage right" and "stage left" mean. You should know what goes into a costume change. One of my first plays I was really proud of (a lovely adaptation of Alice in Wonderland that is being prepared for publication) involved a breakaway chair, a breakaway cup and an ONSTAGE costume change (Alice's hair turns from brunette to blonde). I knew that these would be difficult to do from experience as an actor but wanted them in there anyways. The director (a friend of mine) almost shot me in the difficulty (it was a no budget Children's theater) of trying to figure these things out. But we managed. 2 years later, for an adaptation of Tom Sawyer I did for the same theater, I simplified, keeping all but the last scene in one location, minimal costume changes, etc.

I'm rambling here, I know, sorry. Here's what I suggest. Get involved in the local theater scene, even if it's just watching rehearsals or feeding lines to actors. Watch how the director blocks the scene, learn terminology and jargon (some writers never go into such detail [like Pinter] but you can be damn sure they know it. Other flood their scripts with it [I do, but that probably comes from reading too many Harlan Ellison screenplays where he writes out exactly how he imagines the shot taking place].) Read plays (all the ones suggested here are great. Go to amazon and look up any plays that have won Tony's. You can usually pick up an actors copy script cheap). Watch plays, if you can't see them live then watch "Live on Stage" DVDs. Go to a college library and look for a cheap, used copy of a theater or acting text book. If you can, sit in on an acting or beginning theater class.

Break A Leg--Bloo

[Maryn]

A pleasure to have you here, Bloo--thanks for sharing your experience.

Maryn, shaking hands

[Bloo]

glad to be here, even though the last thing I needed was another message board to visit LOL

[Clueless]

It really helps to have acted in plays, especially as minor characters.

I've helped a couple of my friends with their plays, mostly on their dialogues, because they've experienced the plays in every way but actually acting on the stage.
Each play has a flow, and being in it can help you figure out what the whole play is supposed to feel like.
If you're a minor character, your role is more about setting up the mood for everyone else, and making the transitions easier.
Also, keep the blocking to a minimum. Those two hints helped me out when I started.

[Clueless]

Try reading scripts. There's a very specific way to write plays, that goes beyond just writing. A lot of the play depends on the direction of it. Reading scripts kind of taught me when to dictate word by word what should happen for the sake of the play, and when to let the director take artistic liberties... I've acted in a couple of plays, and every single time there has been at least one line or stage direction that needs to be changed for the sake of resources or stage set-up. Even two companies that produce the same play will create two different results, from stage setting to direction and blocking.