Quotes from Theresa Rebeck

I think we have a cultural difficulty with looking at our problems.

In the theater, there's an emphasis on the singular voice. You know, it's your play. And in television, there's so much institutional involvement. So you end up having to negotiate with a lot of people, and that provides a kind of wear and tear on the spirit.

Not so long ago, my feminist education taught me to ask the question, 'Is the gaze male?' The answer, apparently, is yes, which is why so many movies and television shows are about men and not women.

When people tell me I'm a prolific writer, it's a nice thing to say. But I think to myself, 'Yeah, but I don't do anything else.'

I like to write. Prolific is part of who I am.

New York was the Promised Land growing up. Writers were gods! The great gods of American culture... I thought.

The stage gives you more control over your own work; in television, there's a distressing amount of communal writing. Unless it's your show, you have no control over that. You're at the mercy of whoever's running the show.

Some people think big audiences are crass and that, say, a comedy that appeals to a wide audience is pandering. Other people would argue that you could say that about Moliere.

I think, with most writers, their neurosis is finishing things. I have a different neurosis. I'm terribly anxious when it's not finished. Then I become really difficult to live with.

I would rather work in the theater than anywhere else, and it does seem to be a place where stories can and should be told purely.

Watching people toss all caution to the wind, who are ready to put their lives on the line for a dream, is something that is accessible.

Part of the problem with producing contemporary political theater in America today is that many theaters don't have flexibility or resources, be it hiring a lot of actors or staging a work that might be tough for some audience and board members.

I have always worked consistently, even in small ways and even in smaller theaters where I'll do One Acts or something.

Obviously, a theatrical masterpiece needs more than a plot; many television shows are nothing but plot, and it is doubtful that they will stand the test of time. But I also don't think that making fun of plot or acting like we're all somehow 'above' structure is such a good idea.

Generally, what I try to do is always have a money gig and an art gig.

Rarely do I try to pull a creature out of life and make it a character.

I actuall have to defend realism in theatre because I think TV does it badly - so corrupted by layers of bureaucrats who want to leave examination or psychology.

Our distorted media culture sees men as subjects and women as objects; in films, Woody Allen gets older and older and still dates 20-year-old babes; movies about women are called 'chick flicks,' and men make fun of them.

I work hard. I like getting to the end of things. And I write my plays that way.

Theater can be elusive and poetic, but it doesn't thrive when it doesn't reach an audience.

The ridiculous way that workplace politics are conducted completely gets in the way of excellence in America.

I have two sensational kids who I have raised with my husband, hoping and working every day to help them become healthy, happy, and decent human beings.

The myth that theater isn't for everybody is total nonsense. In the 18th and 19th centuries, everybody in America used to go to the theater all the time. The shows they went to see were big, crazy melodramas that had careening storylines and houses burning down and pretty girls in danger and comedy and death and destruction.

Show business is a struggle. I certainly wish that I had just blasted on the scene and not had quite such a hard time. But there's a great sense of the relief in that you don't have to prove yourself anymore.