|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
In 1946, construction began on the Lake Matoaka
Amphitheater at the College of William and Mary. It’s purpose at that time
was to serve as a home for a drama
about the American Revolution, called “The Common Glory, “ which was
presented every summer until its
demise in 1976. Through the years, the amphitheater was also used for other
theatrical performances, and most notably during the time of Howard Scammon,
the former head of the Department of Theatre and Speech. Scammon could
frequently be seen striding the stage, text in hand, giving his all for
Shakespeare’s King Lear. All that has gone by the
boards, of course, and the amphitheater, for whatever reason, has been
allowed to deteriorate to the point that it’s in dire need or resuscitation.
And that may be about to happen. In the February 4, 2000 edition
of the college newspaper, The Flat Hat, President Timothy Sullivan announced
that an anonymous donor had given the college $3.85 million, thus “enabling
it to restore the amphitheater on the banks of Lake Matoaka.” Sullivan went on to say that he expected
work on the amphitheater to begin soon and hoped the facility would be ready
for performances in another two years.
What prompted such a sanguine prediction
from Sullivan is hard to say. Obviously an architect had been consulted,
since the article indicated that the plans at that time called for new
lighting, a removable band shell that would direct sound toward the audience,
and new acoustics arrangements. Indeed, soon after this
announcement, there was posted on the website of Daedalus, a cost analysis firm, the news that William Rawn
Associates had requested an analysis for conceptual options to renovate the
amphitheater with a glass structure and full performance equipment. Rawn
Associates is presumably the architectural firm the college consulted. Yet still no work was begun on
the amphitheater, and in early 2002 it was announced on one of the college’s
websites that the initial donation of $3.85 million had been increased to $5
million. At roughly the same time – on
January 7, 2002 – Sam Jones, the Vice President for Management and Budget,
sent a memo to Sullivan, indicating that the state legislature had agreed to
an educational bond issue, which would include a total of $61 million for the
college, with $2.5 million allotted specifically for the renovations of the
Lake Matoaka Amphitheater. The amphitheater, said Jones, would serve “as an
outdoor venue for Jamestown 2007 activities.” No other use for the facility
was mentioned in the memo. This same emphasis on the
Jamestown 2007 festivities is found in the website announcement of the $5
million donation. The amphitheater, it says, “will serve as a performance
area for university and touring groups and host presentations of the
Jamestown 2007 celebration.” This raises several questions. What, for instance, happened
between 2000 and 2002 to boost the cost of the Amphitheater’s renovations
from $3.5 million to what is now projected to be between $8 and $10
million? And is the amphitheater to be
used primarily for celebrations of Jamestown 2007, which would mean a lot of
money invested for activities lasting one year, or will the college community
benefit from the reconstruction for many years to come? In early 2001, a committee –
consisting of administrators, representatives from the city, and faculty members from affected departments,
such as Theatre and Speech, Music, and Dance - was formed to meet with the architects
and let their desires and concerns be made known. Evidently this committee
met once and has not been reconvened for over a year and a half. What is clear, however, is that
faculty members involved in theater and music support the proposal and
believe the renovated amphitheater would be, to some degree, helpful to their
departments. While for theater students
there would be a venue that is quite different from the studio theater in
which they now do most of their work, there is no talk of moving main stage
productions or the Shakespeare Festival to the amphitheater. For the Music Department a
renovated amphitheater might well provide a unique opportunity for the
presentation of ensemble productions, such as the Middle Eastern music
ensemble or the jazz ensemble. Orchestra, choir and band usage would probably
be minimal, however, given the seasonal time frame in which the amphitheater
can be used. Other suggested uses for the
amphitheater involve the prospect that it might well serve as the summer home
of the Virginia Symphony, though the idea of successful symphony performances
in the heat of summer in an uncovered auditorium seems iffy at best. And, according to one member or the
committee, rock and band concerts were discussed as definite possibilities. The point is that, before
voters cast their ballots in November, the college should make public the
actual cost of this project, as well as the plans for the renovations,
including noise impact studies. It should also make crystal clear why costs
have soared and exactly what uses they envisage for the amphitheater. Will
the emphasis be on its importance to the mission of the college and its
students, or will the amphitheater become a half-way house for groups and
events, cultural or not, which should ideally have another home of their own
in the area? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lewleadbeater.com Copyright 2002 All Rights Reserved
email: LWL@lewleadbeater.com |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||