I've often called the lighting for the stage the "music for the eye", because it has the same way of making an atmosphere, making a landscape, changing fluidly from one place to another without seeming effort.

I feel also that the rhythm of a production is made by the lighting. If it feels like it's too long and too slow, it may well be because the light is changing in a way that makes the audience feel that way. Definitely I feel that light and music are very closely related.

There is a way to support the art and to allow and encourage the art to flourish while being critical. In fact, I find in teaching that self-critique is one of the best ways to have your art grow, but if you start tearing yourself down then, it's not going to go anywhere. I feel the same about critics. I feel that's happening all too often.

I always say, or have said in the past, that ninety-nine and forty-four-hundredths of the audience does not pay any attention to the lighting, but one hundred percent is affected by it.

I know too many playwrights, or would-be playwrights, or would-have-been playwrights, that are around my age, who were bitter or have gone to something else because they got such a raw deal from critics, and some are quite wonderful writers.

I call the art of theatre a "dirty art", since there are so many people involved who have needs and whims to be satisfied.

After years and years of accumulating papers, I keep feeling that I should give them to the library or something because they are beginning to overwhelm me.