George Luscombe Directing Chicago ’70 at Toronto Workshop Productions: an insider’s subjective account
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article is a revised and expanded version of a talk prepared for The Art of Directing symposium, Celebrating Peter Stein at the University of Toronto, 7 June 2014. as Documentarist / Director as Activist the topic of the panel in which participated. For this panel talked about the creation of Chicago '70 at Toronto Workshop Productions (aka: TWP), January to March 1970. This show developed collaboratively by the ensemble with the direction of George Luscombe who, in many productions and especially this one, showed himself both a documentarist and an activist. George's importance in Toronto and in English Canadian theatre Many readers already know a lot or a little bit about George. Here's a brief backgrounder for those who might not. The late theatre critic and artistic director Urjo Kareda called George Our Father (Bush 191). Why? Because George on the scene first, developing new work from 1959 when the very few professional productions in Toronto were touring shows from elsewhere, reliable classics, and recent Broadway or West End hits. TWP in operation some ten years before important companies like Factory, Passe Muraille, Tarragon, and Toronto Free appeared. Theatre-makers in other parts of Canada would acknowledge George's influence. Besides Chicago '70 his many innovating productions include Hey Rube!, The Mechanic, Che Guevara, Mr Bones, The Good Soldier Schweik, The Mac Paps, Olympics '76, and of course Ten Lost Years. George committed to original creation, to new looks at old plays, to strong political content and to building a fulltime paid ensemble of actors who would train as well as perform together. In her review of our book Conversations with George Luscombe: Steven Bush in conversation with the Canadian theatre visionary, veteran theatre practitioner Lib Spry wrote: I surprised to discover in these conversations that Luscombe a fervent believer in Stanislavski. The shows saw did not have anything in them that then associated with Stanislavski--they were physical, lively, fun, thought-provoking and even in the most emotional of moments, it the audience whose guts were being wrung, rather than the actor's. Indeed the eclectic mix that George's theatre included influences from Joan Littlewood's understanding of Brecht & Epic Theatre; Rudolf von Laban's Efforts; British Music Hall; Circus; Mime; Commedia; Chinese Opera; and Vakhtangov. And yet his foundation always Stanislavski. TWP and me My role in the Chicago '70 project--along with everybody else in the ensemble--was as Actor/ Researcher/Co-Creator. But also functioned as informal Dramaturge. My tasks included (in close collaboration with George) editing transcripts, organizing units of dramatic material into a playable sequence, and (with fellow actor Mel Dixon) putting our work-script into readable form. [FIGURE 1 OMITTED] This the last of the five shows did as an actor with George and this the project on which worked most closely with him until, over a quarter-of-a-century later, we recorded the conversations that eventually became our book. The Activism of the Director George had East Toronto working-class roots. He an activist who was on picket lines at 16 (Luscombe, qtd. in Bush 163). He remained on the side of Labour and the Left to the end of his days--though sometimes very critically. And he had five formative years acting with Joan Littlewood and Ewan MacColl at their politically committed Theatre Workshop in London. He also the first director in Toronto--to my knowledge--to actively practice colour-blind casting. George once said: I don't train actors. train citizens (qtd. in Bush ix). The Activism of Chicago '70's Ensemble-of-the-Moment Who were we? We were actors of diverse experience, training, and cultural backgrounds and most shared George's artistic values as well as the desire to put our politics onstage. …
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".