Issue: Motley Theatre Design Course is closing down: what are we going to do about it?
Convener(s): Ellan
Participants: various
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
What can we do in the short term?
- express support, spread the word, join the facebook group and visit the website, add a testimonial – the alumni are collecting testimonials from directors, producers, etc who’ve worked with alumni, as well as alumni themselves.
Comments:
The course has to maintain its individuality
Be open to anyone.
Value the individual artist
Could it be run in the same way the Birkbeck Course is set up?
Be part of a university but not have to have grades and assessments? Can theatre challenge the current academic set-up? – probably not! A former student of the Drama Centre talked about what happened when that was absorbed into an institution – tutors lost control, were forcibly retired, course seems to have changed for the worse, less rigorous, less involved with the industry?
Alison and Ashley have taken it to this level, now someone else needs to step up and take it forward to the next level, find a new model for running it while keeping the essential ethos.
Could we keep the studio open next year even if the course isn’t running? Keep it as a workshop, drop-in studio, ex-students etc can come in and work, keep the space and the Motley community alive even if the course is lying fallow for a year. A space for peer mentoring.
We could maintain the energy and the name this way, but it still needs leader(s).
Keep the space going, and the leadership will emerge eventually – the will is there.
At the moment there is no one specific crisis which we can address, more a combination of circumstances, so it’s difficult to know how to progress – hopefully the situation will become clearer once the trustees have had their meeting; and hopefully at that meeting they’ll be impressed by the huge amount of support for Motley – facebook group etc..
A clear public statement needs to be made.
The SBTD – are they aware? Are they doing anything about this?
What about the SOLT? They have money, they support young producers via the Stage 1 bursary, might they be able to help?
This is not simply a funding issue – who will step into Ali and Ash’s shoes?
Don’t have to look at it as a crisis – it’s an opportunity to restructure, and solve some of the problems that Motley’s had.
We need to value vocational training more.
Motley is special because of the amount of skill-sharing from industry practitioners – if it closes, there’s nothing else like it to replace it; many of the tutors work for free, many only teach at Motley; if it closes, they’ll all carry on designing etc, they won’t be passing their skills on to designers at other institutions.
Why doesn’t the industry engage more with what it wants from new talent?
Many educational institutions aren’t engaging with the industry they’re supposed to be training people for.
Is Motley overburdened with the weight of its past? Do we need to be more cold and unsentimental? - but perhaps that’s what makes it different, why it hasn’t been subverted and compromised and turned into just another design course.
Re-consider the model of Motley – but who’s going to lead that process?
If the Motley manifesto is changed, it becomes just another design course; there are already more designers entering the profession than there are jobs for them.
What is it that is unique about Motley?:
- approach to text, different from many other places, ability to have the conversation with the director, think like a director..
- all teachers are practicing professionals first, teachers second
- industry links
- graduate employment record
- size
- independence
- non-academic entry criteria, un-graded, non-accredited
Part of the ethos of Motley is giving: tutors give their time for free, friends of Motley donate books, equipment etc – will the closure of Motley affect the spirit of giving, of philanthropy within the industry?
Is it wrong to expect those who run the course to juggle that with their careers?
Could a better balance be created between the two things? If the course leaders were paid more, and could afford to spend more time on the course? More money for an administrator?
Directors are able to use Motley projects as R&D periods for their own work, in a similar way to drama schools and directing courses.
The current model doesn’t work, it’s unsustainable.
If Motley is discontinued as a training institution, could it continue in some other form, perhaps as a bursary or internship with a company or a designer? Something like Alison’s at Stoke – the only thing like that that still exists is the RSC internship scheme, there should be more training schemes that offer opportunities for graduate designers to learn on the job.
The industry needs to take more responsibility for the training of young designers.
We should also celebrate the training that it gives you to go on and do other things outside of the theatre industry – alumni say the skills and experience they get from Motley benefit them for the rest of their lives.
Clarity, communication: What is the problem? What does Motley NEED?
Why does the industry still need Motley? What is its USP? What needs to change and what needs to be maintained?
How can it change with the times, as the industry changes?
What will the industry lose if Motley closes?
Part of what’s special about it is that it has a sort of ‘underground’ feel, but that’s also part of the problem.
Keep some form of momentum or it will die – if it’s quiet for even a short time, it’ll lose its place in the industry – try to maintain the space and the community in some form.
The effects of Motley closing won’t be felt now, but five or ten years hence when there are no new Motley designers coming fresh into the industry.
Rather than being absorbed into an academic institute, could Motley become part of a theatre? Somewhere that has money, space, an administrative framework to run the course while the teachers get on with teaching. Apparently there was some conversation about this with the National, but they pulled out when they realised they weren’t likely to make any money from it. Greedy – they’re subsidised, they’re our NATIONAL THEATRE – don’t they have a duty to nurture young artists without trying to make money out of them?! Someone suggested the Old Vic – apparently they have lots of money, and they already run the new voices scheme, so have an interest in developing emerging artists.
Need to work out who would benefit from having Motley in their building…
Monday, 7 February 2011
ISSUE 11: BIG PLAYS. BIG CASTS. WHERE HAVE THEY GONE?
Issue: Big Plays. Big Casts. Where have they gone?
Convener(s): Daniel Goldman
Participants:
Rose Biggin, Nicola Stanhope, Sarah Punshon Jen Toksvig, Daniel Bye, Adam Barnard, Antonio Ferrara, Jonathan Holloway, Roddy Gauld, David Luff, Matt Trueman, Martin Parr, Tommy Lexen, Paschate Straiton, Clhloe Dechery, Rhiannon A, Alex Jamieson, Amber massie-Blomfield, Lise Marker, Malken Bruun-Aanodt, Eleanor Lloyd, tThomas Eccleshare, Alan Sharpinton, Lucy Oliver Harrison
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Questions that arose… And answers
Where is large scale theatre happening?
Schools, TV, Community, Drama School, Am Dram, West End, Major Subsidised Theatres (RSC/National/Globe)
Why is there no funding?
Personnel costs to high. Spaces to small to balance budgets. Too risky an investment. Before, lets say in Shakespeare’s time, productions were supported by guilds… not so anymore… (Corporate Sponsors???)
How big is big?
8 or 12 or 20 or 100 actors in an aircraft hangar.
Where do we put these big plays? Where are the spaces?
Oudoors. Major theatres. West End. West End has 64 theatre makers on the payroll. Wicked has 35+ etc.
Small spaces make it difficult to work at a large scale.
Would more money mean bigger plays?
Is there a way of making large scale work without exploiting professional theatre makers?
Community casts/ Working with amateurs. Working with young people. Its important to give back to/care for these “volunteers”. Training. Sharing. Support etc.
Big productions work. They travel the world. But how do you sell them/sell the vision?
Should theatres support large scale new writing?
How do you move beyond the fringe when making big work.
Do playwrights want to write big plays?
Why do we need/love big plays with big casts?
Some stories require a big cast for the telling. Big is beautiful.
Should anyone be working for free? Should we entertain the notion of a fringe minimum salary?
Generally, being paid is better than not but the establishment of an fringe minimum (under the living wage) might do more damage. Let each company offer the most it can offer in the given circumstances.
How do we get corporates/angels supporting large scale work/any work?
Some had tried and found it very difficult.
Thoughts to making big theatre with big casts doable and easier.
1) Don’t work full time hours - rehearse part time for longer
2) Be savvy
3) Co-productions (become a bigger fish)
4) Raise your profile
5) Rep system ? (advantages – training, familiarity vs disadvantage – quality (sometimes)
6) New funding means – Complimentary activities (nightclub/bar/restaurant/corporate/teaching etc.)
7) Adopt an actor schemes
8) Long term planning
9) Good quality work!
10) Give give give
11) Sell the process
12) Don’t be so precious about your artistic soul
13) Bar splits – engineer contracts with theatres in your favour
14) Find your own space – too expensive and limiting to rent theatre spaces
15) Higher ticket prices (value of our theatre?)
16) More versatility
17) The 40/45 hour week. If you’re paying equity rates, get the most out of your actors. If they’re doing 20 hours of shows a week. Use them for the other 25!
18) Keep it real – you don’t start a start up business with 20 people… you grow into a company of twenty
19) Find an angel ☺
Convener(s): Daniel Goldman
Participants:
Rose Biggin, Nicola Stanhope, Sarah Punshon Jen Toksvig, Daniel Bye, Adam Barnard, Antonio Ferrara, Jonathan Holloway, Roddy Gauld, David Luff, Matt Trueman, Martin Parr, Tommy Lexen, Paschate Straiton, Clhloe Dechery, Rhiannon A, Alex Jamieson, Amber massie-Blomfield, Lise Marker, Malken Bruun-Aanodt, Eleanor Lloyd, tThomas Eccleshare, Alan Sharpinton, Lucy Oliver Harrison
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Questions that arose… And answers
Where is large scale theatre happening?
Schools, TV, Community, Drama School, Am Dram, West End, Major Subsidised Theatres (RSC/National/Globe)
Why is there no funding?
Personnel costs to high. Spaces to small to balance budgets. Too risky an investment. Before, lets say in Shakespeare’s time, productions were supported by guilds… not so anymore… (Corporate Sponsors???)
How big is big?
8 or 12 or 20 or 100 actors in an aircraft hangar.
Where do we put these big plays? Where are the spaces?
Oudoors. Major theatres. West End. West End has 64 theatre makers on the payroll. Wicked has 35+ etc.
Small spaces make it difficult to work at a large scale.
Would more money mean bigger plays?
Is there a way of making large scale work without exploiting professional theatre makers?
Community casts/ Working with amateurs. Working with young people. Its important to give back to/care for these “volunteers”. Training. Sharing. Support etc.
Big productions work. They travel the world. But how do you sell them/sell the vision?
Should theatres support large scale new writing?
How do you move beyond the fringe when making big work.
Do playwrights want to write big plays?
Why do we need/love big plays with big casts?
Some stories require a big cast for the telling. Big is beautiful.
Should anyone be working for free? Should we entertain the notion of a fringe minimum salary?
Generally, being paid is better than not but the establishment of an fringe minimum (under the living wage) might do more damage. Let each company offer the most it can offer in the given circumstances.
How do we get corporates/angels supporting large scale work/any work?
Some had tried and found it very difficult.
Thoughts to making big theatre with big casts doable and easier.
1) Don’t work full time hours - rehearse part time for longer
2) Be savvy
3) Co-productions (become a bigger fish)
4) Raise your profile
5) Rep system ? (advantages – training, familiarity vs disadvantage – quality (sometimes)
6) New funding means – Complimentary activities (nightclub/bar/restaurant/corporate/teaching etc.)
7) Adopt an actor schemes
8) Long term planning
9) Good quality work!
10) Give give give
11) Sell the process
12) Don’t be so precious about your artistic soul
13) Bar splits – engineer contracts with theatres in your favour
14) Find your own space – too expensive and limiting to rent theatre spaces
15) Higher ticket prices (value of our theatre?)
16) More versatility
17) The 40/45 hour week. If you’re paying equity rates, get the most out of your actors. If they’re doing 20 hours of shows a week. Use them for the other 25!
18) Keep it real – you don’t start a start up business with 20 people… you grow into a company of twenty
19) Find an angel ☺
ISSUE 12: PRACTICAL COMPOSITION
Issue: Practical composition
Convener(s): Lizzy Westcott
Participants: Andrew Scullin, Simon Pollard, Mary O’Connor, Suzy Almond
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Lizzy called for suggestions about the practicalities of composition for musical theatre. How to progress if you hit a wall. Mary talked about Dalcrose Eurythmics, a fairly abstract method which helps to surrender the constraints and rules of standard composition, embracing ‘mistakes’ as they do not matter in the journey, as long as you reach your destination.
T.E.D. Talks and Bobby Macferrin sound as if they are singing from the same hymn sheet.
Kodaly. Hand gestures and forgetting the standard A-G scale. Read ‘Dramatic notes’ By Neil Brand.
Simon uses music as inspiration before starting work on a piece. Helps to channel creativity. Music is important even in ‘Non-Musical’ productions.
Andrew suggested to not fear completing an idea which you feel is bad or trite as this may be what the other parties are looking for. Most creative types are their own worst critic.
An actress popped up and mentioned a more ‘found sounds’ process, allowing the performers to become one with the music. Choreographer also talked about creating the dance and the music in tandem. This could result in a more powerful piece.
Important not to feel like a fraud if you have no traditional training. The confidence in your music is what counts. Don’t looked at people who are sight reading as more capable. Their rules are also their shackles. Without rules, there are more options, right or wrong.
Don’t get too clever. A flourish is nice but sometimes entirely unnecessary. There’s a lot to be said for simplicity. If your cast aren’t alienated, this will result in quicker understanding of the music = better performance.
Alex’s suggestion of using a musical theatre idea in a gig setting, therefore turning the tables somewhat.
Suzy added her lack of knowledge of her instrument is actually more freeing, allowing her scope to play with the words and is not a distraction. Followed up by a group appreciation imperfection. Judi Dench, Lee Marvin, Woody Allen.
Let’s create an opera performed by people who ‘can’t’ sing.
Convener(s): Lizzy Westcott
Participants: Andrew Scullin, Simon Pollard, Mary O’Connor, Suzy Almond
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Lizzy called for suggestions about the practicalities of composition for musical theatre. How to progress if you hit a wall. Mary talked about Dalcrose Eurythmics, a fairly abstract method which helps to surrender the constraints and rules of standard composition, embracing ‘mistakes’ as they do not matter in the journey, as long as you reach your destination.
T.E.D. Talks and Bobby Macferrin sound as if they are singing from the same hymn sheet.
Kodaly. Hand gestures and forgetting the standard A-G scale. Read ‘Dramatic notes’ By Neil Brand.
Simon uses music as inspiration before starting work on a piece. Helps to channel creativity. Music is important even in ‘Non-Musical’ productions.
Andrew suggested to not fear completing an idea which you feel is bad or trite as this may be what the other parties are looking for. Most creative types are their own worst critic.
An actress popped up and mentioned a more ‘found sounds’ process, allowing the performers to become one with the music. Choreographer also talked about creating the dance and the music in tandem. This could result in a more powerful piece.
Important not to feel like a fraud if you have no traditional training. The confidence in your music is what counts. Don’t looked at people who are sight reading as more capable. Their rules are also their shackles. Without rules, there are more options, right or wrong.
Don’t get too clever. A flourish is nice but sometimes entirely unnecessary. There’s a lot to be said for simplicity. If your cast aren’t alienated, this will result in quicker understanding of the music = better performance.
Alex’s suggestion of using a musical theatre idea in a gig setting, therefore turning the tables somewhat.
Suzy added her lack of knowledge of her instrument is actually more freeing, allowing her scope to play with the words and is not a distraction. Followed up by a group appreciation imperfection. Judi Dench, Lee Marvin, Woody Allen.
Let’s create an opera performed by people who ‘can’t’ sing.
ISSUE 13: HOW CAN WE MAKE THE PROCESS OF TOUR-BOOKING BETTER FOR ARTISTS AND COMPANIES?
Issue: How can we make the process of tour-booking better for artists and companies?
Convener(s): Simon Day
Participants: `Martin McLean, Jorgen Tjon, Kate Hall, Thursa, Fionn Gill, Olga Petrakova, Katie Roberst, Matthew Austin, Rachel Brisco, Lucy Oliver-Harnsen, Bill Bankes-Jones, Simon Pittman, Marie Juliet, Joey Morse, Liz Chen, Zane Herma, Eleanor Klidingfield, Jo Crowley, Katie Duffy, Flavia Fraser-Cannon, Alfie Massey, Emma Dedkin, Simon Bedford and others
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Question has come about for me after experience of booking a regional tour following a successful Edinburgh. Although our small company (The Plasticine Men) have a good outcome, I found the process baffling. Why was so much work being duplicated? How are you supposed to conduct so many conversations at once and come up with a coherent schedule at the end of it? I thought that there must surely be a better way to do things…
It quickly became apparent that there were broadly three types of people represented in the discussion. Small companies relatively inexperienced at booking tours, experienced producers/organisations working with more established companies, and directors/programmers of venues.
The main thrust identified that the building of relationships was key, and that effective tours are many months, sometimes years in the planning, with communication between the venues and the companies/producers that they trust.
The question for me then moved on to whether small companies starting out with an ambition to tour, and without those relationships in place, should essentially aspire to find someone with that track-record to work with. The impassioned response from those people (I’ll call them ‘producers’ as a catch all term for now) was an unequivocal ‘NO!’. All the producers were forthright in recognizing the value of their own experience and knowledge, and in expressing a genuine willingness to share it with those individuals and companies who displayed the initiative to ask for it; it was offered that they share a responsibility, even an obligation, to do so, and underlined that there really wasn’t a right way and a wrong way. Examples were given of where this may have happened, through various ad hoc relationships and mentoring opportunities, or specific regional initiatives for instance.
Where certain regions had formal initiatives that linked venues’ programming, it was put that all venues operate within ‘invisible’ structures of recommendations. The model of co-commission, or associate venues was also put forward as a good way to facilitate touring opportunities after Edinburgh.
The discussion concluded with those individuals professing to possess valuable knowledge and experience that they would be willing to share, providing their contact details so that I could get back to them if I decided to move ahead with a plan to create a resource of some kind.
Other points raised/discussed
There was some discussion around the merits of a web-based resource to enable emerging companies to identify and communicate with venues, with many points well made on either side of the argument:
FOR AGAINST
Each new ‘intake’ of aspiring companies essentially duplicate eachother’s work every year in building their own databases. Company’s/producers may be protective of information that they’ve put a lot of effort in to collate.
Much of the information that needs to be gathered is public-domain, just not all in one place. The information is already out there, on the web and in the Performing Artists’ Yearbook.
A system akin to universities clearing system could help smaller companies fill available slots. This may also help communication when the ‘merry go round’ of bookings is set in motion where a company bails on one London fringe venue in favour of another one, and leaves a gap that should be filled. Web resources are only as useful as how much they’re used, and need extensive maintenance.
Theatre is lagging behind a little in comparison to say, music industry, in utilising potential of web and information systems. Information, systems etc. can never replace the importance of relationship building.
Resource could be a logistical tool to help rather than an attempt to replace the building of relationships.
A central resource could be very useful for producers having to find the right venues for groups with specific access requirements.
In globalised world, resource could offer global perspective for international touring.
• Defining WHY you want to tour to a particular venue is crucial.
• Questions were asked of what may be learned from models and structures of other countries. Consensus seemed to be that there were as many approaches as there are countries, and that whatever happens, we shouldn’t go the way of the Americans!
• It was put that although funding cuts’ affect on the key relationships and programming was still an unknown quantity, that already venues may be seen to be becoming more risk averse, and reluctant to offer favourable deals.
Convener(s): Simon Day
Participants: `Martin McLean, Jorgen Tjon, Kate Hall, Thursa, Fionn Gill, Olga Petrakova, Katie Roberst, Matthew Austin, Rachel Brisco, Lucy Oliver-Harnsen, Bill Bankes-Jones, Simon Pittman, Marie Juliet, Joey Morse, Liz Chen, Zane Herma, Eleanor Klidingfield, Jo Crowley, Katie Duffy, Flavia Fraser-Cannon, Alfie Massey, Emma Dedkin, Simon Bedford and others
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Question has come about for me after experience of booking a regional tour following a successful Edinburgh. Although our small company (The Plasticine Men) have a good outcome, I found the process baffling. Why was so much work being duplicated? How are you supposed to conduct so many conversations at once and come up with a coherent schedule at the end of it? I thought that there must surely be a better way to do things…
It quickly became apparent that there were broadly three types of people represented in the discussion. Small companies relatively inexperienced at booking tours, experienced producers/organisations working with more established companies, and directors/programmers of venues.
The main thrust identified that the building of relationships was key, and that effective tours are many months, sometimes years in the planning, with communication between the venues and the companies/producers that they trust.
The question for me then moved on to whether small companies starting out with an ambition to tour, and without those relationships in place, should essentially aspire to find someone with that track-record to work with. The impassioned response from those people (I’ll call them ‘producers’ as a catch all term for now) was an unequivocal ‘NO!’. All the producers were forthright in recognizing the value of their own experience and knowledge, and in expressing a genuine willingness to share it with those individuals and companies who displayed the initiative to ask for it; it was offered that they share a responsibility, even an obligation, to do so, and underlined that there really wasn’t a right way and a wrong way. Examples were given of where this may have happened, through various ad hoc relationships and mentoring opportunities, or specific regional initiatives for instance.
Where certain regions had formal initiatives that linked venues’ programming, it was put that all venues operate within ‘invisible’ structures of recommendations. The model of co-commission, or associate venues was also put forward as a good way to facilitate touring opportunities after Edinburgh.
The discussion concluded with those individuals professing to possess valuable knowledge and experience that they would be willing to share, providing their contact details so that I could get back to them if I decided to move ahead with a plan to create a resource of some kind.
Other points raised/discussed
There was some discussion around the merits of a web-based resource to enable emerging companies to identify and communicate with venues, with many points well made on either side of the argument:
FOR AGAINST
Each new ‘intake’ of aspiring companies essentially duplicate eachother’s work every year in building their own databases. Company’s/producers may be protective of information that they’ve put a lot of effort in to collate.
Much of the information that needs to be gathered is public-domain, just not all in one place. The information is already out there, on the web and in the Performing Artists’ Yearbook.
A system akin to universities clearing system could help smaller companies fill available slots. This may also help communication when the ‘merry go round’ of bookings is set in motion where a company bails on one London fringe venue in favour of another one, and leaves a gap that should be filled. Web resources are only as useful as how much they’re used, and need extensive maintenance.
Theatre is lagging behind a little in comparison to say, music industry, in utilising potential of web and information systems. Information, systems etc. can never replace the importance of relationship building.
Resource could be a logistical tool to help rather than an attempt to replace the building of relationships.
A central resource could be very useful for producers having to find the right venues for groups with specific access requirements.
In globalised world, resource could offer global perspective for international touring.
• Defining WHY you want to tour to a particular venue is crucial.
• Questions were asked of what may be learned from models and structures of other countries. Consensus seemed to be that there were as many approaches as there are countries, and that whatever happens, we shouldn’t go the way of the Americans!
• It was put that although funding cuts’ affect on the key relationships and programming was still an unknown quantity, that already venues may be seen to be becoming more risk averse, and reluctant to offer favourable deals.
Friday, 4 February 2011
ISSUE 14: I'M A PRODUCER. DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT ME TO PRODUCE?
Issue: I’m a producer. Do you have something you want me to produce?
Convener(s): Paul Cabrelli
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Paul Cabrelli
pcabrelli@gmail.com
07791 184025
Also: Connecting producers and projects generally
Ed Jaspers
www.teaseltheatre.co.uk
ed@teaseltheatre.co.uk
Useful resources: www.producershub.com
info@nordicnomad.com
Tango Web
Old Vic
SOLT – Society of London Theatres
BAC – young producers network
MA or MFA in Producing
Anthony Nielson “The Cencors”
JMK
Artsjobs
Artshub
FUEL
High Tide
Arts Admin
“China Plate” in the Midlands
Meetup.com
Problems with Producers:
1 You feel creatively threatened
2 Only interested in money-making (disputed by the producers present).
3 Should producers be in at the start of a project or in later (most producers want to be involved from the start). Some producers want to do just the “nuts and bolts”; others wand creative involvement.
4
Producers can help you by:
1 Developing an “arts culture” and theatre on a wider scale.
2 Helping you to take a risk.
3 Being a strategist.
4 Being an administrator.
5 Being a project manager.
6 Facilitating artistic development.
7 Most producers do not want to simply find the money.
8 Being a mentor and partner
9 Being a spokesperson for the audience.
10 Providing networking opportunities.
Is being a producer creative?
1 Can help you to see the potential of the work.
2 Can help you stretch the work.
3 Can help by embracing the artistic vision.
4 Can help by creating the environment to make everyone look better.
5 Can help by responding and building.
6 Putting “fuel in the tank”.
7
Questions:
1 Do producers have to be passionate about their project?
2 What is the relationship between directors and producers?
3 Are producers interested in process or product?
4 Is anybody interested in international collaboration?
5 Most producers want to see the show not a video of it.
6 Should you stay in London or go to the provinces? Very London-centric, increased vibrancy in regions
Convener(s): Paul Cabrelli
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Paul Cabrelli
pcabrelli@gmail.com
07791 184025
Also: Connecting producers and projects generally
Ed Jaspers
www.teaseltheatre.co.uk
ed@teaseltheatre.co.uk
Useful resources: www.producershub.com
info@nordicnomad.com
Tango Web
Old Vic
SOLT – Society of London Theatres
BAC – young producers network
MA or MFA in Producing
Anthony Nielson “The Cencors”
JMK
Artsjobs
Artshub
FUEL
High Tide
Arts Admin
“China Plate” in the Midlands
Meetup.com
Problems with Producers:
1 You feel creatively threatened
2 Only interested in money-making (disputed by the producers present).
3 Should producers be in at the start of a project or in later (most producers want to be involved from the start). Some producers want to do just the “nuts and bolts”; others wand creative involvement.
4
Producers can help you by:
1 Developing an “arts culture” and theatre on a wider scale.
2 Helping you to take a risk.
3 Being a strategist.
4 Being an administrator.
5 Being a project manager.
6 Facilitating artistic development.
7 Most producers do not want to simply find the money.
8 Being a mentor and partner
9 Being a spokesperson for the audience.
10 Providing networking opportunities.
Is being a producer creative?
1 Can help you to see the potential of the work.
2 Can help you stretch the work.
3 Can help by embracing the artistic vision.
4 Can help by creating the environment to make everyone look better.
5 Can help by responding and building.
6 Putting “fuel in the tank”.
7
Questions:
1 Do producers have to be passionate about their project?
2 What is the relationship between directors and producers?
3 Are producers interested in process or product?
4 Is anybody interested in international collaboration?
5 Most producers want to see the show not a video of it.
6 Should you stay in London or go to the provinces? Very London-centric, increased vibrancy in regions
ISSUE 15: INTERNATIONAL CRISIS / THE WHITEST ROOM
Issue: International Crisis/ The Whitest Room
Convener(s): Dominic Campbell
Participants: About 12 people came and went over the course of 2hours – (add your name please I couldn’t interrupt the conversational flow to gather them)
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
I feel slightly inadequate to the task of representing this conversation affectively, so if you passed through or contributed to this dialogue please add!!!
It started slowly with four people explaining what it was about the phrase “International Crisis/The Whitest Room” that attracted us to this particular corner of the room;
• A project that was setting out to be global and local
• Curiosity about the privilege of a position that allows us to consider ourselves in a crisis. A crisis of privilege/privileged crisis
• Considerations of culture’s relationship to race, power, class, globalism, environmentalism
• A curiosity about the changing nature of Global dynamics, and the inadequacy of our own education or sources of reference, in facilitating our ability to hold multiple cultural perspectives in equal value.
Underpinning these were concerns about the role, strategy, function, language (and ability to refute these) of a performance/theatre artist. And concerns about the ability of p/t artists to engage people, or with technology, institutions, Corporate entity, State, educational systems, and media.
(ok breathe, now do you understand why I’m challenged by the recorder’s task?)
From here the conversation blossomed touching on;
The aspirations that motivate individual engagement with performance or theatre, the opportunity to transmit this to a wide population
Fluid’s podcast theatre for personal moments establishing personal but shared theatre (or is this “theatre”? or an emergent form?)
The democratic nature of Twitter’s offer to establish communities of interest cf Facebook’s offer of competitive allegiance.
The use of tech, the headspace it creates or is establishing, the difference between this mental space and the mental space used in creating performance, the difference between online and “meatspace” exchange, limits and values of both.
“Appointment theater” - “calls me into the space for special time/ritual”. “Supplies my need for ritual”.
Live theatre enables us to practice being together, enables us to practice conversing.
Live theatre as means to sustain purely social relationships cf a social relationship based on trade or exchange or vs the promotion of competitive individualism.
London as a cultural roundabout where non-UK formed cultures meet leading to international exchange (eg Indian and African continent artists meeting in London then take work to each others locales)
The role of p/t artists in the migration across sectors, borders and mindsets of knowledge, assumptions, ideas and attitudes.
The opportunity of non UK artists to inform the solution to the UK’s Crisis
This is 2011 not 1977 – it’s not the same crisis and we blind ourselves seeing it though that optic – it is international, the same cuts strategy apparent in several countries, its driver is globalised incorporation not the politics of nation states.
Economic cuts to the arts makes no economic sense so what sense does it make? or are our leaders none too clever?
Did a decade of State support for arts and State encouragement of participation infantalise artists?
Should artists assume more responsibility, how?
Are existing structures fracturing and therefore is an opportunity opening to establish new ones?, once the old one’s clear.
A need to hold physical space – eg student temporary occupation of colleges acted as magnets for intellectual exchange that is sustained online
The reverse model – Tea Party starts as Twitter conversation then physical manifestation
Why do people March? – the physical manifestations of protest – (a) movement – “change” made literal, metaphor.
The inverse form of protest – standing still in a place that’s always moving – “a jolt to reality”
“Mirrored” or “twinned” demonstration – simultaneously in two physical spaces (plus online) for real time demonstrations of solidarity and awareness and visibility
The industrialization of the theatre sector in last decade, matched by failure to change the position of the artist. Increase in management or arts not payment to or value rating of artist. Reflective of the “Big Society”?
In 1980’ s access to becoming an artist was possible through unofficial support structures (eg Unemployment benefit), later through University grants and loans, and now…..?
How do we maintain an opportunity to transmit the values of being able to make theatre to a wide population of potential artists (regardless of our attitude to the work they make)
The challenges that come with being aware of “the connection between Boadroom conversations and stepping onto the stage” – how few artists occupy these positions, being the only artist in the Boardroom, retaining or reclaiming one’s own language in this context, the need for artists to be part of this conversation and not exclude themselves
“A silence on March 30th for those voices that will be stilled”.
Crisis as:
an opportunity to clarify your commitment and that of others,
to bond in opposition,
to explore or establish an economy that can facilitate this.
A conscious strategy to avoid producing “serving the master” relationships in an economy that supports creation.
The tendency of this to emerge from crowd sourcing funding models, which replicate patronage
Failure or difficulty in the position of a state arts council to speak to power
UK culture can be understood as fundamentally bi-polar (left/right – high/low) or oppositional (right-wrong) and is based on a word alphabet. Chinese culture based on communicating through pictogram and hieroglyph embraces a greater degree of interpretation (eg “ a bit more right than entirely wrong”). Is this perhaps enabling of what seems to us a (creative?) fuzziness, a different (to us) relationship between power and responsibility and the relationship between individual creativity and embrace by the mass?
Is China not competing with US, just in the process of doing something completely different? Returning to the fuzziness of pre Enlightenment power dynamics?
Is this mindset (new to us) valuable (to us)
What can we learn from this that is valuable and are we capable of unlearning ourselves to partake of this exchange.
And much much more
Convener(s): Dominic Campbell
Participants: About 12 people came and went over the course of 2hours – (add your name please I couldn’t interrupt the conversational flow to gather them)
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
I feel slightly inadequate to the task of representing this conversation affectively, so if you passed through or contributed to this dialogue please add!!!
It started slowly with four people explaining what it was about the phrase “International Crisis/The Whitest Room” that attracted us to this particular corner of the room;
• A project that was setting out to be global and local
• Curiosity about the privilege of a position that allows us to consider ourselves in a crisis. A crisis of privilege/privileged crisis
• Considerations of culture’s relationship to race, power, class, globalism, environmentalism
• A curiosity about the changing nature of Global dynamics, and the inadequacy of our own education or sources of reference, in facilitating our ability to hold multiple cultural perspectives in equal value.
Underpinning these were concerns about the role, strategy, function, language (and ability to refute these) of a performance/theatre artist. And concerns about the ability of p/t artists to engage people, or with technology, institutions, Corporate entity, State, educational systems, and media.
(ok breathe, now do you understand why I’m challenged by the recorder’s task?)
From here the conversation blossomed touching on;
The aspirations that motivate individual engagement with performance or theatre, the opportunity to transmit this to a wide population
Fluid’s podcast theatre for personal moments establishing personal but shared theatre (or is this “theatre”? or an emergent form?)
The democratic nature of Twitter’s offer to establish communities of interest cf Facebook’s offer of competitive allegiance.
The use of tech, the headspace it creates or is establishing, the difference between this mental space and the mental space used in creating performance, the difference between online and “meatspace” exchange, limits and values of both.
“Appointment theater” - “calls me into the space for special time/ritual”. “Supplies my need for ritual”.
Live theatre enables us to practice being together, enables us to practice conversing.
Live theatre as means to sustain purely social relationships cf a social relationship based on trade or exchange or vs the promotion of competitive individualism.
London as a cultural roundabout where non-UK formed cultures meet leading to international exchange (eg Indian and African continent artists meeting in London then take work to each others locales)
The role of p/t artists in the migration across sectors, borders and mindsets of knowledge, assumptions, ideas and attitudes.
The opportunity of non UK artists to inform the solution to the UK’s Crisis
This is 2011 not 1977 – it’s not the same crisis and we blind ourselves seeing it though that optic – it is international, the same cuts strategy apparent in several countries, its driver is globalised incorporation not the politics of nation states.
Economic cuts to the arts makes no economic sense so what sense does it make? or are our leaders none too clever?
Did a decade of State support for arts and State encouragement of participation infantalise artists?
Should artists assume more responsibility, how?
Are existing structures fracturing and therefore is an opportunity opening to establish new ones?, once the old one’s clear.
A need to hold physical space – eg student temporary occupation of colleges acted as magnets for intellectual exchange that is sustained online
The reverse model – Tea Party starts as Twitter conversation then physical manifestation
Why do people March? – the physical manifestations of protest – (a) movement – “change” made literal, metaphor.
The inverse form of protest – standing still in a place that’s always moving – “a jolt to reality”
“Mirrored” or “twinned” demonstration – simultaneously in two physical spaces (plus online) for real time demonstrations of solidarity and awareness and visibility
The industrialization of the theatre sector in last decade, matched by failure to change the position of the artist. Increase in management or arts not payment to or value rating of artist. Reflective of the “Big Society”?
In 1980’ s access to becoming an artist was possible through unofficial support structures (eg Unemployment benefit), later through University grants and loans, and now…..?
How do we maintain an opportunity to transmit the values of being able to make theatre to a wide population of potential artists (regardless of our attitude to the work they make)
The challenges that come with being aware of “the connection between Boadroom conversations and stepping onto the stage” – how few artists occupy these positions, being the only artist in the Boardroom, retaining or reclaiming one’s own language in this context, the need for artists to be part of this conversation and not exclude themselves
“A silence on March 30th for those voices that will be stilled”.
Crisis as:
an opportunity to clarify your commitment and that of others,
to bond in opposition,
to explore or establish an economy that can facilitate this.
A conscious strategy to avoid producing “serving the master” relationships in an economy that supports creation.
The tendency of this to emerge from crowd sourcing funding models, which replicate patronage
Failure or difficulty in the position of a state arts council to speak to power
UK culture can be understood as fundamentally bi-polar (left/right – high/low) or oppositional (right-wrong) and is based on a word alphabet. Chinese culture based on communicating through pictogram and hieroglyph embraces a greater degree of interpretation (eg “ a bit more right than entirely wrong”). Is this perhaps enabling of what seems to us a (creative?) fuzziness, a different (to us) relationship between power and responsibility and the relationship between individual creativity and embrace by the mass?
Is China not competing with US, just in the process of doing something completely different? Returning to the fuzziness of pre Enlightenment power dynamics?
Is this mindset (new to us) valuable (to us)
What can we learn from this that is valuable and are we capable of unlearning ourselves to partake of this exchange.
And much much more
ISSUE 16: MAKING WORK THAT'S A BIT TABOO, A LITTLE BIT NAUGHTY
Issue: Making work that’s a bit taboo, a little bit naughty
Convener(s): Emma Deakin
Participants: Emma, Jamie, Louie, Kate, Paul, Mary, Allen… and a few more I think…
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Taboo subjects discussed such as;
Religion, War, Terrorism, Pedophilia, Miscarriage, Menopause, loads and loads…
It seems that TV and film can address these issues ‘easier’ than theatre can, why? Comedians also are another example, they very rarely shy away from taboo!
Why is this kind of work missing in our theatres at the moment, historically theatre has always been there to challenge and present taboos to their audience. However there seems to be little being made around the taboo subjects that matter to us. Theatre has a place to talk about what is not talked about!
Venue’s not always willing to touch it as its too risky?? Do they feel there is a danger in selling/marketing this kind of work to their audiences? They need to be more commercially viable, this means less risk taking?
About half way through the session we talked about how it was interesting that there were only three of us sitting here talking about this…hmmm…why? …Then a few more people showed up and the session was on its second wave! ☺
Talked about Lisa’s show (No Idea), which was edgy on disability and challenging but honest telling it like it is… this level of honesty can manage to lessen the ‘taboo’
COMEDY within the naughty/taboo subjects. Getting an audience to laugh when they don’t think they should be, also lessens the taboo, keeps it real.
Knowing why you want to tell the story & address this subject material is the most important thing.
TRUTH
HONESTY
Using verbatim. The honesty in this is gold - and often you couldn’t write it!
No matter what the subject material, when you give the audience credit & intelligence, and approach them and yourself with truth and honesty then the work can become something very special.
Dangers or pitfalls that may be encountered when making work that’s taboo or issue based;
When the person/people making it are too close to the subject material OR when the makers are not informed enough about the subject material, too distant
The work being self indulgent
The work turning into a lecture, being didactic
Creating a piece that is a ‘carbon copy’ of what the REAL issues are. Work that begins to go somewhere and is then shying away.
Action: I (Emma) am going to start developing the piece which was the inspiration of this session and will contact those (who agreed and gave email addresses) with invitations to work in progress and/or writing to get feedback throughout the process ☺
If anyone else was at this session and wants to get in touch to offer feedback about the work I am making please let me know – emma@shakyislestheatre.com
I would be very grateful to receive feedback throughout the making of this piece so that I don’t end up becoming a self indulgent wanker making it ;-)
Convener(s): Emma Deakin
Participants: Emma, Jamie, Louie, Kate, Paul, Mary, Allen… and a few more I think…
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Taboo subjects discussed such as;
Religion, War, Terrorism, Pedophilia, Miscarriage, Menopause, loads and loads…
It seems that TV and film can address these issues ‘easier’ than theatre can, why? Comedians also are another example, they very rarely shy away from taboo!
Why is this kind of work missing in our theatres at the moment, historically theatre has always been there to challenge and present taboos to their audience. However there seems to be little being made around the taboo subjects that matter to us. Theatre has a place to talk about what is not talked about!
Venue’s not always willing to touch it as its too risky?? Do they feel there is a danger in selling/marketing this kind of work to their audiences? They need to be more commercially viable, this means less risk taking?
About half way through the session we talked about how it was interesting that there were only three of us sitting here talking about this…hmmm…why? …Then a few more people showed up and the session was on its second wave! ☺
Talked about Lisa’s show (No Idea), which was edgy on disability and challenging but honest telling it like it is… this level of honesty can manage to lessen the ‘taboo’
COMEDY within the naughty/taboo subjects. Getting an audience to laugh when they don’t think they should be, also lessens the taboo, keeps it real.
Knowing why you want to tell the story & address this subject material is the most important thing.
TRUTH
HONESTY
Using verbatim. The honesty in this is gold - and often you couldn’t write it!
No matter what the subject material, when you give the audience credit & intelligence, and approach them and yourself with truth and honesty then the work can become something very special.
Dangers or pitfalls that may be encountered when making work that’s taboo or issue based;
When the person/people making it are too close to the subject material OR when the makers are not informed enough about the subject material, too distant
The work being self indulgent
The work turning into a lecture, being didactic
Creating a piece that is a ‘carbon copy’ of what the REAL issues are. Work that begins to go somewhere and is then shying away.
Action: I (Emma) am going to start developing the piece which was the inspiration of this session and will contact those (who agreed and gave email addresses) with invitations to work in progress and/or writing to get feedback throughout the process ☺
If anyone else was at this session and wants to get in touch to offer feedback about the work I am making please let me know – emma@shakyislestheatre.com
I would be very grateful to receive feedback throughout the making of this piece so that I don’t end up becoming a self indulgent wanker making it ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)