Riddell's vision questioned in developing drama program

This is the first article in a two-day series about the Duke Drama program. Tomorrow's article will focus on the departure of professors and students from the program at the end of this academic year.

Two years after Duke Drama director David Ball left the University amid charges of sexual harassment, the drama program is still struggling to recover.

After weathering a period of transition last year under interim director Dale Randall, professors and students still have questions about the drama program's future, as newly appointed director Richard Riddell completes the first year of his five-year contract.

Specifically, they have concerns that Riddell has no vision for developing the program.

Riddell, a Tony-winning lighting designer, came to Duke from Harvard, where he served as the director of Harvard's Institute for Advanced Training, one of the most highly-regarded graduate programs in the country.

The transition from the Ball regime to Riddell's has been rough for three-quarters of the current drama students--those whom Ball recruited. These students came to Duke with expectations that they would study drama under Ball's intensive program, which placed a strong emphasis on acting training.

While Ball did not run a conservatory dedicated exclusively to the teaching of acting, he had a very structured program that catered to the interests of his acting students. Riddell claims he wants to mold the program into one that is based more on liberal arts and academics and move away from the acting emphasis.

"I want a conservatory-style experience within the context of a liberal arts program," Riddell said, explaining the rationale behind the changes. "I'm a real believer in history and teaching of knowledge. I believe that is an asset for students who want to go out and act."

Riddell refutes these observations, saying that from day one of the interview process last spring he has been "crystal clear and consistent about the overall vision of the program."

"There are some people around here who don't have a big problem with what we're doing," Riddell said. "I think sometimes it comes down to not understanding and there are ways to work on that. Sometimes there's disagreement. Sometimes when people disagree about where the department is going, it can lead to acknowledgments of the disagreement, or other things."

Riddell outlined three specific areas that he includes as part of his overall vision for the program.

• Riddell wants to nurture individuals with an interest in going on into the theater professionally. Training would include a background in literature as well as exposure to many elements of theater such as directing and designing "so that when they leave Duke they have an understanding of the field of theater and are confident in taking the next step."

• Equally important, said Riddell, is to focus on the non-majors at the University who are not planning to pursue drama as a career. "For them I think the goal is to get them an understanding and an appreciation of the art--the theater."

• The third part of Riddell's future for the program is developing new works, which can range from student-written plays to professional pieces such as premiere Broadway shows.

It may be unfair to try and judge Riddell's performance after only one year. Riddell said that he wanted to use this year as an opportunity to learn everything about the program before he looked to make changes for the future. But some say he has been unclear in communicating with the rest of the program.

"If Richard would have said to us, `This is my dream department, this is where the program is going,' we would have respected the decision," Blickenstaff said. "But he did not do that."

Not everyone thinks Riddell lacks a focused agenda. Enoch Scott, a sophomore drama major, thinks Riddell has a clearly defined vision, but that the transition period has been rough.

"I think right now the program is in a state of flux," Scott said. "The way I perceive it is he wants a program that's more academic [than under Ball]. He's creating more classes that study theater and understand theater."

But Scott also has concerns about the curriculum. He is worried about losing skill courses--voice and movement courses designed to professionally train actors. Both faculty and students have voiced their concerns to Riddell, and he said he understands their confusion.

"I feel that students and faculty are not clear on where the drama program is going. Why? It gets down to changes that take place when there is a change of directorship," Riddell said, acknowledging that the students miss the structure that Ball imposed.

"I did not anticipate completely the particular challenges of walking into this program," Riddell said.

Randall and acting director of undergraduate studies Jody McAuliffe declined to comment on the changes within the program. McAuliffe is the acting DUS while John Clum is on sabbatical.

While there are complaints about the direction of the program, it is difficult for those working with Riddell to voice them because they claim he is inaccessible. Riddell has maintained a closed-door policy, preferring to schedule appointments in advance.

Riddell said that due to the length and intensity of some of his meetings, it is impossible to allow people to casually drop into his office to talk with him. In addition, the door is literally kept closed since it is a fire door, Riddell explained. To this explanation, another professor remarked that in his many years with the program, no fire marshal has ever inspected the drama office.

"A lot of problems students have, is with his accessibility," said Rob Milazzo, a junior drama major. "You go in five times a week and never see him in his office. Students feel a bit alienated at this point. He needs a year or two to create some kind of camaraderie."

Riddell, however, dismisses the notion that he is inaccessible, claiming that if people did not want to make an appointment to see him they could call him, and he would return their calls.

During the rehearsal period of "Our Town" early this spring, Riddell did not come into the office until after noon, largely because he worked in the theater until 11 p.m. But, with a fax machine at his house, he said he still conducted business in the morning hours.

Some have said that his accessibility has improved since the completion of "Our Town" and since he returned from a one-month trip. Before coming to the University, Riddell had agreed to work on a play in London this spring. But some professors say that his accessibility problems have existed all year long.

Concerns about Riddell's vision and accessibility have both been brought to his attention. Many students and professors hope that some measure of overall consistency is reached. This is a program that has had three directors in the last three years.

"I want the best things for me and the students to come," Scott said, anticipating two more years in the program. "I'm going to wait. But I'm not going to wait forever."