Entertainment - Home Page

100 Years of the Society of London Theatres

Royal Court Theatre

May 7, 2008

ary Couzens

Mary Couzens for EXTRA! EXTRA!

2008 marks the centenary year of The Society of London Theatres (SOLT), the trade association formerly known as SWET (Society of West End Theatres), founded in 1908 by Sir Charles Wyndham which represents the producers, theatre owners and managers of the major commercial and grant-aided theatres in Central London. In addition to its original roles, today the Society also contends with industrial relations and legal advice for its members, and performs a ‘campaigning role for the industry’ in that it launches a ‘wide range of audience-development programmes to promote theatre-going.’

In Honour of its Centenary,SOLT has launched Celebrate the Play – Spotlight on Drama this May in order to ‘focus on how plays and playwrights have made a unique contribution to British Society and the cultural landscape in the last 100 years.‘ With those points in mind, we attended a special platform event on the ‘state of the play’ at the Royal Court on May 7th. The event was chaired by long-term Guardian theatre reviewer and author Michael Billington and the panel was as follows: theatre producer Sonia Friedman who is currently producing Polly Stenham’s debut play, That Face a Royal Court, West End transfer now running at the Duke of York Theatre, Almeida Theatre’s Artistic Director Michael Attenborough, Edward Hall Theatre Director (and founder of Propeller Theatre Company) who is currently directing Deep Blue Sea at the Vaudeville Theatre, Playwright Roy Williams, whose plays Baby Girl - NT (July 07) and Days of Significance -RSC at the Tricycle (March 08), are only two of many of his works which have been staged in London, and Playwright/Director Peter Gill, whose revival of his play Small Change (1976) he is currently directing at Donmar Warehouse.

May 7th was an apt date for such an auspicious gathering, as it marked the anniversary of the very first play staged in the West End (The Humorous Lietenant which opened in 1663) as well as the 44th Anniversary of the first staging of John Osborne’s ground-breaking play Look Back in Anger (1956). Osborne’s play, his third and first staged at the Royal Court, seemed shocking to many at the time, but is now widely acknowledged to have changed the face of British post-war theatre, or, as John Lahr stated in a New York Times Book Review Article in a manner more appropriate to the tone of Osborne’s play: “wiped the smugness off the frivolous face of English theatre.”

Now let us ponder the questions, and possible answers this debate’s Chair, Michael Billington and the illustrious Panel of Celebrate the Play: Spotlight on Drama proposed…

After stating that ‘last year, definitely the year of the musical in SOLT member theatres, there were over a hundred plays playing to 2.5 million people which were about twice what Broadway memberships were for plays,’ impressive statistics, to be sure, SOLT Vice-President Sir Stephen Waley-Cohen, went on reiterate that point stating, ‘how important plays really are,’ be they… ‘a revival of Major Barbara (NT), or the 50th Anniversary of The Birthday Party or The City here at the Court, adding that it was his ‘pleasure and honour’ to introduce the chair of the debate, Michael Billington. For more information on The Birthday Party, at Lyric Hammersmith and The City at the Royal Court, please see our listings and ‘latest theatre reviews’ link on our homepage.

Michael Billington seemed to be in his element as the chair of the panel, as he introduced its participants, dubbing them ‘the most fantastically experienced panel to discuss the state of the drama,’ as ‘everyone on the stage has a vested interest in drama.’

Producer Sonia Freidman who had, apparently, just returned from Broadway that very morning where she’d been supervising the opening of her West End hit Boeing, Boeing, which, Billington claimed should be a ‘bigger success there than it was here in London’ had returned to oversee the opening of the Royal Court’s West End transfer of That Face at the Duke of York Theatre opening that Friday, May 9th, which she is also producing.

On Billington’s immediate right was Director Edward Hall, who is currently directing Deep Blue Sea, which had opened at West End’s Vaudeville Theatre Tuesday, April 29th. Naturally, the chair enthusiastically added ‘Of course Edward runs his own extremely successful Propeller Theatre Company,’ a company which, having seen several of their productions, all, distinctively original and accessible Shakespearian ones, are, in my own considered opinion, second to none in terms of often, simultaneously funny and touching inventiveness.

Michael Attenborough, Artistic Director of the Almeida Theatre was seated on Billngton’s left. Attenborough’s most recent work, a production of Harold Pinter’s seminal play, The Homecoming, was dubbed ‘superb’ by the Guardian writer, which, means quite a lot, coming from the man who has often been hailed ‘London’s favourite theatre critic.’ Billington’s monthly column at the back of the London Theatre-Goer magazines, available for free in West End theatre lobbies, are often an interesting read, especially as they often strewn with the merits of fringe theatre productions, though specific mention of London’s booming, diverse and affordable fringe theatre scene were, unfortunately, not made in today’s discussion focusing on ‘the play,’ as the spotlight was more on the relationship and differences between dramas staged in the West End and Off-West End Theatres.

Peter Gill, who is currently directing a well-received revival of his 1976 play Small Change, set in 1950’s Cardiff, at the Donmar Warehouse acted as a sort of devil’s advocate throughout the discussion, often offering alternative viewpoints to those which seemed to be the ones most widely held. His many years of distinctive writing and directing, as well as observing have no doubt afforded him a very educated, and in his own case, wise and witty perspective from which to access all things theatrical.

Playwright Roy Williams, who was seated beside Mr. Gill has had many well regarded plays staged in recent years including, the RSC’s recent production of his play Days of Significance (2008) at the Tricycle Theatre and Sing Yer Heart Out for the Lads (2004) and Baby Girl (2007) at the National, as well as three plays at the Royal Court. His personal belief that the play is alive and well comes as no surprise.

Following what Billington hoped would be a forty minute discussion, (which wound up being over an hour) questions were to be invited from the audience. The Chair then put forth his initial question, which he also claimed was the ‘fundamental one.’

‘As there are 25 Musicals in the West End or at least 25 at any given time or usually more than that – 28, 29 even…Is the straight play an endangered species as a commercial proposition?’

Producer Friedman began the answer portion of the session with another question, saying that ‘the bigger problem’ is ‘How do producers go about producing commercial plays?’ Naturally, from her perspective as one of the West End’s most prolific and successful producers, her concerns in relation to the question she proposed were initially, financial ones, but as she spoke, it was apparent that her producing problems are actually two-fold, in that today’s productions have a definite need for ‘household names’ and ‘sold out runs’ in order to recoup on costs. However, the real problem, it seems, from Friedman’s perspective, has to do more with the way ‘our culture has changed,’ in that the ‘way our actors commit themselves to do work in theatre has changed,’ in terms of ‘stars’ deciding between theatre and film work, as they often tend to back out of theatre contracts, even at the ‘last minute’ should a lucrative film offer appear.

During the course of her insightful comments, Friedman also harkened back to the day when ‘theatre stars’ were distinctly separate from ‘film stars,’ indicating that the blurred boundaries between the two often generate problems for producers and subsequently, productions, as these days theatre-goers and theatre owners alike often want to know ‘who’ is going to be in a production before they ask ‘what’ the play is. There are also the potential problems which can arise when an actor who is used to working only in film or on television takes to the stage, such as whether he/she is capable of performing eight times a week for ten to twelve weeks at a time. However, given the fact that if a production was ‘sold out’, it would often be ‘based on their film career’, the risks involved in working with film, as opposed to theatre stars can sometimes, be in danger of becoming obvious ones.

Director Edward Hall agreed with Freidman, saying that he’d worked in various theatres and it does come down to ‘getting a star,’ adding that years ago, in relation to plays, it would of course have been a case of ‘who was in it,’ as it would have had a ‘great bearing on what we could and couldn’t do, and sometimes it was the actors and sometimes the play. But now, (in a commercial sense – i.e. West End), where you have no subsidy, it is absolutely the actor.’ However, Hall has, by his own admission, taken ‘a different approach’ to West End projects, stating that his current production being staged there, Deep Blue Sea at the Vaudeville Theatre, is a ‘case in point,’ as he’d ‘moved away from West End directing and gone out regionally where there is less of that pressure.’ Apparently, the play he is currently directing ‘wasn’t designed,’ to his way of thinking, ‘to go into the West End.’ His concluding statement was a telling one in that he declared that, ‘…that (Deep Blue Sea) was a play I wanted to do for a long time,’ But, ‘if I wanted that designed for the West End properly, I wouldn’t have done the production I’ve done.’

The next question Billington put to his panel was ‘Does the same argument apply to working now within the subsidized sector?’ Do you too have to think about star casting to make a project work?

The Almeida Theatre’s Artistic Director Michael Attenborough was an obvious choice to answer that query, though he admitted that when he took over at that theatre six years ago, they were too ‘star-related,’ in that it was getting ‘a bit like who’s on next rather than what’s on next.’ Attenborough confirmed that he wasn’t into that way of doing things especially as from where he is sitting the economics involved are completely different to Producer Freidman’s West End parameters. He added that he prefers to go for an actor because he is ‘right for the part’ rather than because he’s a ‘bigger name’ than the next person. However, he agreed with Hall and Freidman that the current situation in the West End in relation to big names in plays does pose questions about ‘who’s a star.’ That question naturally tends to be answered much differently at the Almeida, than it would in the West End, as actors who are seen as stars at the Almeida, because they are ‘wonderful leading actors with tremendous theatrical track records, aren’t selected purely on the basis of ‘their box office pull.’ Attenborough cited actress Helen Mc Crory, currently starring in Ibsen’s Rosmersholm at the Almeida as such a star. Having seen her fine performance in Platanov at the Almeida some years ago, I feel inclined to enthusiastically agree with his assessment of Ms. Mc Crory as a ‘star.’

This line of thought was also commented on by Edward Hall who is currently directing Deep Blue Sea in the West End. In regard to the subject of ‘true’ theatre stars, whom Hall said, “give you choice”, the director cited versatile actor Kenneth Branagh, as an example, who of course, started his career in theatre. In Hall’s experience, sometimes actors who are famous for film, but have very little theatre experience ‘can’t reach beyond the fourth row.’ Yet another good reason to queue for those often inexpensive day seats in the front rows!

In my own experience, I could also cite examples of several productions which were viewed and reviewed as excellent ones which did not do as well as anticipated in their transfers from Off West End theatres to West End ones, presumably due to similar factors. The Bush Theatre’s wonderful production of Richard Cameron’s stunning play, The Glee Club, (2002) which received unanimously rave reviews but was pulled off after a six week run during its transfer to the Duchess, where I saw and savoured it twice, is one prime example. Attenborough’s additional admonition that in most cases, an actor’s main motivation must be the desire to ‘do the piece’ as opposed to ‘the need to make money,’ gives pause to wonder whether in some cases, actors themselves should be subsidized...

At that point Billington broadened the discussion, asking Playwright/Director Peter Gill whether he thought ‘there is anything in the culture at the moment that is anti the play/anti-text.’

Gill quickly responded in the affirmative, saying that he ‘thinks the Arts Council, either consciously or unconsciously propose a fissuring of theatre that, doesn’t exist and shouldn’t exist between the notions of text and non text based theatre…That a question of the part of their program that (mirrors) the New Labour concept of trying to find a soft qualitive access, particularly run by some community centre group or high hand if you happen to think of one… One won’t produce all quality, so the elephant, whatever it is called is a beautiful thing, but is essentially a different thing from doing a play…It’s a lack of understanding of doing variety. The theatre is a wonderful, protean thing in which people can do all kinds of wonderful things. Paradoxically at the same time they (Arts Council) would cut the grant of (some) people…on a purely ageist basis, which is a generally fine text based thing. So there is a fissure being made, an unhealthy one.’ It was all I could do to keep my pen apace with Gill’s essentially wise words!

Billington furthered Gill’s treatise by asking him to elaborate on the notion of the ‘artificial split that they (Arts Council) make between text theatre and non-text theatre,’ to which Gill replied that he’d ‘brought all the non-text based companies from America and Europe…and Japanese’ companies to the Riverside’ (in 1976, he became the founding director of the Hammersmith arts venue), going on to say that he couldn’t understand the ‘us and them’ mentality.

Although Billington agreed with Gill that there is an ‘artificial split,’ he claimed that ‘at the same time, I sense something around us in the air and in the culture that’s suspicious of text.’ Apparently someone had commented to him recently, rather ironically he thought, that ‘the play was as old-fashioned now as a 19th century crinoline.’

Turning to playwright Roy Williams, Billington asked whether he felt his profession was under ‘threat’.

Having a number of successful plays staged in recent years may have influenced Williams’ quick response, though his words seemed well-grounded ones. ‘I’m just on my home computer in my room, writing out the best text I can basically do. I like to think other playwrights are doing the same.’ In light of his many theatrical successes of late, however, Williams’ quip that his main worry “How am I going to pay my rent,’ seemed rather a moot point. However, since the prolific playwright, whose collected plays, Volumes 1, 2 and 3 we recently spied on the shelves of the National Theatre book shop said that paying ‘the rent’ was his main concern, perhaps someone would have done well to ask Williams whether he makes more money from the sale of his plays as texts, than he does when they are staged. Actually, some insight into how well, or poorly playwrights are paid today might have proved interesting at this point.

Billington then specifically cited the Punchdrunk ‘s successful production of The Masque of the Red Death as an ‘extremely tactile’ take on devised theatre within a ‘theatre site,’ to which Roy responded that it wasn’t a style he’d ‘noticed a lot’ adding that he thought such productions seemed to be a ‘style of annotations, more than of original work.’ Williams went on to say that he wasn’t really worried about his profession, as ‘I’ve got work to do and so have my colleagues.’ Although he admitted that just like ‘everybody else’ he wants to ‘go to the theatre and have a good night out,’ though, he continued, he wouldn’t want to see the text ‘suffer,’ because, in his estimation, ‘It’s all about the text…all about the work.’

Borrowing Gill’s word ‘fissure’ Attenborough said that he strongly agreed with what Williams had said, going on to add that, he’d ‘lived long enough’ and ‘seen enough’ (in terms of theatre) to know that ‘people try to split us again and again,’ referring to the text vs. non-text debate. His remembrance of the National Theatre under the Tories (before) was that ‘they said that they (NT) had far too much money and if they gave half of it away, everything would be solved. It’s that terrible divide and rule policy that’s appalling. If we fast forward the tape to now, it’s musicals as opposed to great plays.’

Attenborough was no more certain of the capability of ‘created stars’ who’ve performed solely on television being able to ‘sing for 8 performances a week’ than Hall or Freidman had been, surmising that there’s a ‘quality gap for them.’ In regard to Williams’ former assessment of the importance of the text to theatrical productions, he agreed, stating: ‘A rich theatre culture is one where I am passionate about language and I think that’s what you’re talking about, Peter, (addressing Gill)…’I’m passionate about language and I believe we understand ourselves through language, we think in language. If we impoverish language, we impoverish ourselves and the theatre has a really specific, top role to play.’

Billington deftly changed the subject at that juncture, saying that most theatres in the West End aren’t specifically venues for musical theatre, drolly adding that he ‘couldn’t picture Pinter’s play The Homecoming at the Drury Lane Theatre’, which of course, has generally been known for big musicals like the NT’s transfer of Anything Goes, Broadway hit The Producers and more recently, The Lord of the Rings. ‘A lot of theatres that were once ideal for the straight play have now become musical houses,’ he concluded.

Friedman returned to the conversation then, giving us pause to consider certain points in the process, which, theatre-goers may not generally ponder, answering, ‘Yes they are…There are two or three really beautiful, smaller playhouse that are gone, so producers like me who want to produce fragile new work that would be better off in that place, rather in a 650 seat theatre that’s slightly too big, when I think it should be in a 400 seater that’s more protected, less exposed. A lot of the work we have been doing is with work in smaller playhouses where they feel less exposed. The question is, should I transfer a play from upstairs at the Royal Court to the West End?’ In relation to Friedman’s current project, that of producing Royal Court transfer, That Face in the West End, she had this to say: ‘…I responded to it, I liked it, I wanted to do it and find out what I can do in the best possible way. But there are I think, in terms of “what’s the future” for the playhouse for straight plays, one of the things that theatre owners have been talking about for a long while…and I hope it would happen’, (that they’ll) rethink several of its spaces so that the work can transfer from the, i.e. Almeida more comfortably and there are smaller spaces.’

Getting back to the original question as to whether West End musicals are likely to de-throne plays Almeida director Attenborough claimed that ‘most musicals occupy theatres you wouldn’t want to do a play in anyway.’ A statement which, to my way of thinking, might be challenged via West End transfers such as the Menier Chocolate Factory’s recent production of Little Shop of Horrors (2006) to the Duke of York, the same theatre where Friedman is now producing That Face. Ironically, ‘Little Shop’s’ set designers, led by David Farley had to compress their impressive designs for the Duke of York transfer due to the smaller parameters of that theatre’s performance space, which is too bad, as when the production was staged at the Menier, it’s staging seemed to be crying out for more space, perhaps of the type found in more traditional West End musical theatre venues. But, as Friedman stated, it’s time the whole process of what goes where was subject to a complete re-think by the powers that be!

Billington cited the former White Hall Theatre, now Trafalgar Studios as an example of a theatre that smaller, more sensitive productions of the type Friedman had mentioned might transfer. However, she quickly countered, ‘we need to bring in SOLT, to be part of it…so there are different field, different house arrangements, otherwise they are too expensive to run as West End houses.’ Though, in her experience, she said she’d recently known of actors whose productions were meant to be transferring houses, being ‘in discussion with management’ as they’d ‘complained that they didn’t want to go to a theatre that wasn’t a West End house.’ In conclusion Friedman stated that there is definitely a ‘lack of smaller playhouses.’

Another interesting, rather puzzling point raised by Friedman had to do with her recent time spent in New York opening Boeing, Boeing on Broadway. Even though she claimed she spends exactly the same amount of money promoting shows in the West End as she does in New York, apparently more people seem to know about her productions over there, with everyone from the taxi driver to the hotel staff and police being aware of the opening of Boeing, Boeing. She thought perhaps one of the reasons for that difference might be the fact that not as many shows open on Broadway as they do in the West End, and that in New York, there is only one ‘season.’ However, it would seem that the less is more scenario in New York has the inadvertent effect of making each opening seem like ‘an event’. When she comes ‘back to London’, Friedman claimed, having spent just as much on PR and marketing for her West End openings, ‘Nobody’s there.’ Which of course, leaves the floor open as to whether either way of doing things is good or bad.

Billington interjected at this point, stating that in his view, ‘Manhattan is a small village, basically.’ Freidman didn’t seem convinced of the validity of that notion and her dubious, ‘Yes I suppose so’ reflected that. The chair countered with his considered opinion that ‘The local critic comes to view it…’it’s a very small world.’ Maybe so, but in my experience with the ‘Big Apple’ there’s no way one could navigate that ‘village’ without the aid of some very dogged guides! Friedman spoke from her own experiences, ‘It’s (Broadway) still a commercial world, you can still make a big impact there and thousands and thousands of people come to see your work. Whereas, it’s much harder in this environment, where there is so much going on, to stand out in the crowd. It has to be a real event…a real hit to stand out, to have a real chance of simply recouping.’

Director Hall, who’d been listening intently, said that it’s a ‘a good thing in the way of having a lot on offer,’ in London, citing his visit to the Barbican for a 10:15am performance of Tin-Tin a couple of years ago, as being ‘absolutely brilliant’, from both a time-wise and production point of view. He went on to add that he ‘walked out about lunch time thinking, “This kind of work is going on all over the city.”

I have to say that early morning shows are most prevalent in London over the Christmas period, when Tin-Tin was staged, however, that particular production did have quite a long run. However, having said that, I’ll be reviewing a performance of A Midsummer Night’s Dream at the Open Air Theatre in Regent’s Park in July which begins at 9:45am, and Shakespeare’s Globe will be staging at least one production this season at midnight. Manhattan might be the ‘city that never sleeps,’ but I think it’s probably easier to go to the theatre later at night there, than it would be early in the morning! If anyone reading this knows otherwise, please feel free to contact us and we’ll gladly stand corrected.

Chair Billington then lead the conversation towards the dramatists, starting with Roy Williams, asking him whether it is ‘fair to say that certain dramatists write plays that offer leading roles, in order to attract ‘star’ actors even though it’s a great democratic culture, which is admirable in different ways.’ However, when comparing ‘the 1950’s to today, ‘ Billington cited, ‘ John Osbourne…Pinter generation, or Rattigan and before that…’. Suggesting that contemporary culture may not stand up by comparison, Billington posed the question of whether ‘modern dramatists should write ‘star’ parts.’

Williams was philosophical and diplomatic with his response, answering that playwrights sometimes tend to write roles for ‘actors that we really admire that are not stars,’ going on to say that he’d written a role with an actress who’d performed at the NT in mind, and that ‘if she doesn’t get the nomination this year, I’m not going to the Oliviers. But is she a household name…no!’ Williams also stated that he felt his work might be compromised should he start ‘thinking about a ‘star’ actress.’ Like others on the panel, he felt that it would be much better to get ‘bloody good actors to do the play,’ who will, ‘hopefully become stars.’

The ever contemplative Peter Gill pondered ‘the mystery about what is a star and what is a name.’ Using the Royal Court Theatre as an example, he said that ‘At one time…the cult of star casting was not part of the play’, though plays staged at the Court have been ‘full of stars and created many stars…anti-star casting is only about casting a star into the wrong part.’ To his way of thinking the fact that ‘stars’ tend to have ‘a very narrow gauge of attraction’ is the very reason why they are ‘not right for all the parts.’ As he said, ‘There are stars required because a certain fragility’ is required, and/or, ‘a certain kind of opposing personality, like those we know about depressed drunk males who talk for hours on stage..It’s a question of what makes a star and what makes a name…Edith Evans was one of the greatest actresses I ever saw, but not particularly a great star.’

In answer to Billington’s query on whether the TV industry manufactures ‘stars’, which also lead him to question how much the ‘broadcast media are to blame for the vulnerability level of…the straight play….Does the BBC fail to reflect what is happening to theatre and does it fail to encourage its own form of art?’

In response, director Hall wondered where ‘the next generation of actors are going to come from’, given the current trend of casting inexperienced television ‘names’ and/or film stars in plays. He added that directors ‘don’t like to spend large parts of our day trying to teach actors how to act when you can’t really do it. You can only help them to release their innate talent…so that to me is a star. Now what we are really talking about is a star who can sell tickets and that of course is wrapped up in ticket prices and economics.’

Attenborough said he found such television reality shows ‘nauseating,’ and wondered how they (BBC/TV) ‘can justify such star seeking in the cases of ‘Cameron (Mackintosh) or Andrew Lloyd Webber and not anybody else,’ adding, ‘I don’t see how the BBC allows them to get away with it.’

In response to Billington’s comment that ‘They do get away with it,’ Gill offered an ambivalent answer: ‘But they are very good at developing actors, not just in musicals, but they are often in series or in soaps. It’s not that they are lazy…They’re much less courageous about that…But television and theatre are very good at picking up and developing actors…There might not be enough drama on television.’

As Billington said, ‘People who watch much TV don’t have as much of an idea about what’s going on in theatre at all’, a generalization perhaps, but an apt one, nonetheless.

Both Attenborough and Gill also shared the view that television, in Attenborough’s estimation, the BBC in particular, ‘don’t know what’s going on in theatre, adding that the quality of their drama has gone down. Gill went on to note that there is a ‘real hatred of theatre’ in television land, which he attributes to a ‘partly infantile fear of Shakespeare.’ i.e. ‘I’ve done my A levels. I’ve been there and I don’t ever want to go there again.’ He continued by reiterating that such a phenomena is ‘… part of the under-text of the stand- up media generation, many of whom went to drama departments in universities. A lot of them have their talents made somewhere else. There is a lot of unresolved talk going on, then there is this whole thing about it being rather lardy and you, feeling rather cool, suburbanizing your accent.’ Attenborough agreed, saying’ Yes, you apologise for your education…They are staggeringly out of touch…’

Another contemporary foible that really annoys Attenborough occurs when he’s watching ‘a marvelous drama on television and the credits begin to come up with the most miniscule writing, then they split the screen and then tell you incidentally not what’s next, but who’s on next in great big capital letters, then they zoom back again to find out who did the location painting. You’ve missed out and what it reveals is not just a fundamental discourtesy, but a lack of professionalism.’ ‘But,’ as he added, ‘it’s very revealing with anything that important.’

When Billington commented to Williams’ that he’d had work filmed for Channel 4, the playwright said that he’d 'heard what a lot of people were saying, but he wondered, ‘What we want them to do for us.’

In media’s favour, perhaps, Billington noted that,’ Knowledge of theatre existing along with lots of football and all the other things that exist, makes Britain a rich, exciting place’. He went on to say that, ‘Books exist and books are published in huge numbers every week, plays pour out… And is the theatre more than big musicals?’ leading us to believe that the debate would soon be drawing to a close. However, the chair had one last question to propose: ‘Is it fair to say that the British theatre is nudging towards, or in any way acknowledging a multicultural society?’

As a playwright whose writing reflects cultural diversity, Williams was the first to answer. ‘It’s nudging…whether it’s going all the way…But it’s progress, compared to when I was younger. It’s healthier. It depends on what you mean by multicultural…More Black work, Asian work? If that’s what you mean specifically, then yes. Specifically subsidising the West End is a completely different ballgame.’

Gill then said that his consensus is that ‘Theatre is/was always way ahead of television. At sixteen I went to see a the first production at the Royal Court theatre that had an all black cast, with a young singer called Cleo Lain, that was 1957. With television you hardly ever saw any black people…‘

The last topic on the panel’s agenda often tends to be a daunting one for theatre-goers heading up West End way – that of ticket prices…Billington asked Hall whether he thought of that as another ‘obstacle.’

Hall answered in the affirmative, elaborating thusly: ‘If I was in my twenties and I was thinking about going to the theatre, the choice for me is huge, on how to entertain and stimulate myself, I don’t have to go to the theatre, and ticket prices have a huge, huge bearing on that. That’s a big problem….At the moment, we have to work terribly hard at keeping ticket prices down. Well, everywhere you drop ticket prices that I have ever worked whether that be subsidized, or commercial, (it) has always been massively effective in terms of who walks through that door, no question. Because financially it (theatre) is a loss making venture, it’s a labour intensive, beautiful craft that we, as a nation are particularly good at. It needs support and help in some shape or form and we are endlessly working out how to do that.’

Freidman saw things differently, ‘I don’t think it is just as straight forward as that about ticket prices because of course, that’s the beginning that's the start. There is a genuine suspicion about new work in the West End that hasn’t come by the National or RADA or the Royal Court, and even if you put your ticket prices down to at least 15 pounds, 20 pounds, 25 pounds… Unless it comes with some policy, or some mandate with another theatre you’re not going to sell the tickets, even at a fiver - I guarantee that. The problem is more complex…You might sell them afterwards once the critiques have come along, looked at it, and said “go”, not beforehand.’

However, I beg to differ with that, as most theatre-goers could cite at least one instance of a play being well-reviewed, yet pulled off early. In my own case, I’ve already mentioned one such instance – The Bush Theatre’s 2002 West End transfer of Richard Cameron’s Glee Club, which though glowingly reviewed by all of the major newspapers in mid-April and set to book until mid-October, closed in early July.

Gill offered the solution to the ‘ticket thing,’ as he called it, suggesting that ‘the split’ might be remedied with help from subsidized theatres via new writing.

Although Friedman professed that she would ‘like to be able to develop and commission new work and start it in the West End and not have to rely on another company to do it first,’ she had to admit that it is ‘becoming harder and harder and frankly, almost impossible.’

Billington wanted to know if Polly Stenham, whose debut play, That Face, Friedman is now producing in the West End, had come directly to her with the play and asked her whether she’d do it, she would have done so.

Friedman’s had to admit that if that had been the case, she would have been forced to ‘go around the houses to make sure that the three actresses could make the work more commercial.’ However, she believes Stenham would have vetoed that notion, adding that, ‘The work would have been let to, say the Royal Court (where it was originally staged), and the right thing would happen. Then, I would try to sell it. So you would argue, “What’s wrong with that process?” In that sense it’s the right one, because it wasn’t put under the unbearable pressure they are put under now in a commercial sense.’

At that, Billington wanted to know whether Friedman was saying that, ‘in a sense, a play in the West End benefits from the kind of imprimatur subsidized show and critical acclaim’ offer.

Gill interjected saying, he felt ‘It would be healthier for the West End if the community level could take its time on the West End stage.’

In answer to Billington’s question, Friedman cited The God of Carnage which, she claimed just opened and, is ‘very good,’ as an example of a costly production which would probably not be able to continue its run due to its initial costs. However, one of the things which makes the production so good, the fact that it has, as she says, ‘four big stars in it,’ is also one of the reasons why ‘ the play can’t continue, as Friedman said, she imagines, ’it is too expensive.’

Gill humorously stated that, ‘In subsidized theatre the problem is in replacing the cult of the actor with the cult of the director.’

Billington’s response was, ‘You’re saying that’s a given, and that we are replacing the cult (of the ‘star’ actor) with the director …well I don’t know that we have.

Gill’s insistence that, that is indeed the case drew laughter from panel and audience alike.

Attenborough pointed out an interesting distinction which seemed an obvious one when highlighted, initially stating that he thought Gill’s allegation’s about directors is ‘absolutely true in the bigger houses.’ However, in the Almeida, he believes ‘the writer and actor’ are the main variables, though ‘there are a goodly number of healthy directors around.’ However, it was the lines he drew between the origins of actors and directors that offered the most food for thought: ‘The actor who is absolutely right for the part is often half locked up in a different culture’, he said, whereas, ‘the directors you are approaching are probably doing 90 % of their work in the theatre.’ Attenborough also indicated that he doesn’t necessarily enjoy dealing with agents, to which Bilington replied, ‘Agents are often cited as the villains of the piece, preventing actors from doing theatre, and if they are doing theatre, that they can’t go anywhere outside that contract.’

Friedman didn’t necessarily agree with that, saying that she’d had plenty of examples of actors who called at the last minute or who won’t commit to the last minute because they are up for television. ‘But the agent is very much part of the actors career now in a way that they weren’t always.’

When the floor was opened to questions from the audience, the first came from someone who wanted to know about Friedman’s experiences working for Channel Four and whether it had been enjoyable.

Friedman said, ‘No’, wondering aloud how ‘public her comments would be’, adding that ‘What was really interesting’ is that ‘a million people watch it.’ Having said that, she went on to add that, despite the fact the experience afforded television viewers a chance to watch four or five episodes in which she’d attempted to put on a new play, she still had to admit that its impact on box office sales was ‘zero.’

Gill asked Friedman whether she’d though the selling of Oliver as a ‘new musical’ would happen, which, she claimed, she is actually ‘fine’ with, adding that ‘the thing’ about such TV shows is that ‘the audiences are investing…making choices…voting.’

When Bililngton asked whether there were any more questions, Attenborough jumped into the breech, elaborating on the query posed earlier as to what constitutes a star, claiming, ‘It’s to do with the craft, the ability to be instant.’ In terms of television and film, he felt that instant stardom, is ‘much more available in film and television…the craft needed to occupy the stage, the craft needed to write a play, is something you learn to know, if you don’t learn it, you won’t get any better…Kenneth Branagh is a wonderful actor because that’s where he started…He was taking it seriously. That’s what we have to find at the Almeida…a particular kind of energy…skill.’

Gill brought up the fact that ‘The audience will pay for an extremely satisfying experience.’

Attenborough’s ambivalent response was one many could empathize with, as he pointed out that ‘One of the most agonizing things to have to live through’ is boring theatre, but yet, ‘the most exciting’ is in many avid theatre-goers lives, as in his own, ‘fundamentally theatre.’ His final remarks were among his most memorable in this debate: ‘Good theatre is unforgettable and does change you.’ As is also the case in my own experience, he claimed he still remembered great moments of theatre he has experienced, as ‘great moments’ of his life. Many could also understand Attenborough’s feeling that television is ‘more like an invasion,’ whereas, good theatre has the capacity to ‘change you.’ Gill maintained that theatre can be more ‘democratic’ because film is down to ‘someone manipulating the editing’, adding that it ‘depends usually on the part of the audience.’

Billington then returned the talk to the earlier ‘fissure’ argument, saying that what intrigued him about this generation is how it gets ‘great satisfaction’ from going to ‘an event, that doesn’t require that kind of focus’, citing such things ‘ a kind of sensory experience.’

Gill commented that he 'balks at the notion of who has lately discovered a more devised theatre.’ The fact that ‘a lot of that has to do with young people in drama departments, who only get their money in that department and are not in the literature department,’ has a lot to do with it, as it makes things ‘understandably, performance lead.’

Billington’s own question on that subject was where the ‘generations of graduates ‘ produced by drama departments would be going once their studies were done…into other places…the Arts Council, Transports, etc?’ Gill agreed with that in theory, claiming that ‘The worst side of a child’s education’ is when he/she is ‘not expected to respect anything outside of its own creativity,’ adding that those who fail in the theatre, have a ‘natural anger at our shortcomings.’

Our visual culture was a topic introduced by Attenborough who said he finds it amazing at how quickly his own children ‘read images and respond to them’, adding that he thinks ‘Language has to be fought for now in a way that it hasn’t had to do in a very long time.’ Hall commented that he views the play as being ‘very visual.’

Gill lent a political angle then by mentioning that ‘In 1979, there was a sort of iron curtain brought down on the arts,’ indicating that the ‘whole devised thing’ for his generation, as there were many, many devised plays ‘between the 60’s and 70’s…found, ‘the Arts Lab and endless people railing against the play.’

Friedman seemed to think that Gill was referring to a younger audience, whom she claims ‘have never gone to the straight play.’ This ‘younger audience’ she was speaking of falls within the 18-30 age bracket, and by her admission she believes the fact that ‘they don’t go to the theatre’, presumably meaning West End theatre, as she says that the fact that it (theatre) is ‘populated by an older audience,’ isn’t seen as any ‘threat.’

Williams said he wanted to ‘share some optimism about theatre,’ although he agreed with Freidman that ‘there may be some young people don’t go to theatre.’ He highlighted the fact that ‘a lot of good text-based theatre’ is ‘going to them.’ Williams also stated that ‘there are a lot of companies, both text and non text based saying something about Britain and the state of it, that go into schools,’ calling that process ‘fantastic.’

Ironically enough, the most intriguing, response rousing question from the audience turned out to be from a woman who eventually admitted that she worked for the BBC. She started her inquiry off by saying that she found it ‘interesting’ that one of the things she was getting from the discussion was that ‘television is the enemy.’ The woman then went on to state that television has ‘reinvented itself,’ in that it is ‘not using playwrights’ or ‘actors.’ Her summation that, having listened to the discussion, she still didn’t know ‘if the play is in a healthy state,’ was followed by her admission that she gets complimentary tickets to West End shows as one of the perks of working for the BBC and her assessment that ‘Audiences are changing…I see them getting up and down in their seats with their mobiles on…’, lead Friedman to ask her whether she thought that was ‘right.’ The questioner’s response was ambivalent, as she simply stated that she thinks ‘You have to accommodate it,’ as ‘They are up and down through all performances.’ Friedman’s, ‘That can’t be good,’ was met with the woman’s belief that, ‘You can’t change it. You can’t say reality is no good…They want bottles of water, they want everything in sound bites; that is what is happening.’

Director Hall strongly disagreed, saying, ‘You can absolutely change it…I can’t say to someone, “That’s the way it is,” you can’t do that.’ His firm belief is that, ‘When you watch a good play, what you get is completely hypnotizing and bewitching…the focus, the concentration, the fusing of actor and writer, director and everything, and you’re in a setting.’

Hall's theory that plays should not be filmed for television however, is one some may not feel so adamant about, particularly those for whom theatre ticket prices pose a problem. Though it may be true that in filming plays, something is lost in the translation, and the result may become neither play, nor film, one has only to think of the filmic version of Pinter’s plays The Homecoming and The Caretaker to question Hall’s stance, or to consider the vast audiences plays might reach through television, let alone the possible superiority of their scripts, as opposed to those of many of television’s current offerings. However, as Hall thoughtfully pointed out, ‘There is a proper programme for developing writers’ plays into screen plays, working with the actors’, which, sadly, is practically a non-existent method now. Unfortunately, as the director stated, such methods for filming plays would be ‘expensive’ to put into practice, and ‘the license fees would have to go up.’ Perhaps if appropriate, affordable training were put into place for unemployed and young people to participate in, in order to create viable career opportunities for them in that particular under-developed field, the process might not be so expensive…

Hall’s comments offered Gill a cue to quip that ‘Reality TV is cheaper to do, i.e. Big Brother.’ However, Hall came back by saying that he didn’t really think that Big Brother would influence people’s decisions whether or not to do drama, especially as it ‘puts a lot of money in the bank for those involved.’

As the debate was winding down to its somewhat fore-gone conclusions, I monetarily rested my pen-weary hand, a bit too numbed out to follow the trailing comments to their final utterances, though what follows should provide the gist of what was said.

In the course of his comments about the problems inherent with transferring a play, Attenborough mentioned how a ‘group of lads from Dalston’ who had gone to see a play which had transferred to the West End’s Garrick Theatre during its subsequent run there, had felt very out of place. This class-related insight led director Hall to note that, ‘Plays are often on in spaces that are not friendly.’ Friedman continued along those lines, on, in her words, ‘how a play is shifted,’ citing the phenomena of theatres having ‘seasons’, such as ‘the Haymarket season, the Donmar Season,’ etc., adding that she thought ‘Audiences want to follow an Artistic Director or a policy.’ In her own experiences, it seems she’s seen, ’more and more Artistic Directors running a theatre, completely over-hauling them, giving them an identity and,…audiences will take a risk. If they’ve had a good experience once or twice, they’ll go to everything at that theatre.’

Although there is no one theatre whose productions we have attended regularly, several fringe theatres instantly sprang to mind as Freidman was making these comments - The White Bear, The Rosemary Branch, The Oval House, The Blue Elephant and many others among them. Our volunteers, (eds. included) and many other potential theatre-goers in London who are trying to live by creative means, simply cannot afford to attend West End, or even, Off West End productions with any regularity. At this juncture, three years into the existence of our independent, increasingly well-regarded publication, we'd like to extend our sincerest thanks to all of the Artistic Directors, Theatre Managers, PR Reps, Theatre Companies, Playwrights, Directors, Actors and others who have kindly invited us to review the productions they participate in and/or represent.

Friedman continued on with the discussion, saying she thought it was ‘a shame’ UK audiences generally avoid risk-taking, in favour of playing it safe. She also spoke of the ‘ticket system’ in the U.S. whereby theatre-goers buy a ticket to each and every production a theatre puts on because it’s ‘their theatre,’ quickly adding that she wasn’t advocating ‘subscriptions.’

As there is little or no funding for the Arts in the United States, I supposed Friedman was referring to the ‘season ticket’ type arrangement that I myself have purchased tickets under, at a greatly reduced rate, I might add, for two consecutive seasons at Philadelphia’s Walnut Street Theatre (the oldest continuously operating theatre in America) when I lived in Philly. Such ‘season’ arrangements are one of the main ways that many U.S. theatres help fund themselves, and assure attendance at the same time. I opted for that arrangement based on the reputation that theatre had for its high-calibre (largely star-less) productions, the varied mix of plays on offer, and the fact that it allowed me to be able to arrange my ‘season’ seating well ahead of time and, save quite a bit of money in the process. That concept is similar to the one PBS (public television) uses there, in that to become a ‘member’ of PBS, one pledges a nominal fee, and once payment is made, a gift is sent out in thanks, and one becomes a ‘member’ of PBS television for a year. As there is no such thing as a television license there, it actually constitutes very good value for money.

In the final analysis, Friedman concurred that ‘in the West End, we have to move forward and accept the fact that we can’t just fill playhouses with work that’s just averagely good.’

Taking one last look at the aforementioned ‘star system’, Attenborough noted that ‘The Donmar season is probably the most starry season, so they’re (theatre-goers) not actually going to the Donmar, they’re going to see Derek Jacobi in Hamlet. At that point Edward Hall interjected, ‘Jude Law.’ Undaunted, Attenborough continued, speaking of the new policy which had been instigated at the Almeida, which, seemed like a very fine one. ‘It’s a condition of the booking that when school groups come to the theatre, they get a workshop from us.’

In an attempt to wrap things up, Billington asked his articulate panel to give him one sentence each in response to the question ‘Is the play in a healthy state?’

In light of all of the recent productions of his plays staged in London, it seemed apt that Roy Williams should be the first panelist to answer: ‘Yes, it’s in a healthy state, he answered: ‘There’s good playwrights out there working…or not working.’

Playwright/director Peter Gill was next: ‘It’s the cheapest way to get it out there…One bloke thought it up and everybody else…’ Gill couldn’t have finished expounding on his compressed theory if he tried, as the laughter of audience and panel combined would have drowned it out. ’Cutting edge is often very expensive,’ he continued, when order returned. Conclusion? Billington queried. ‘The play’s a keeper,’ Gill answered succinctly.

Almeida Director Attenborough said the play was ‘unquestionably healthy…still very rich, and it’s expanding.’ In the course of his ‘sentence’, he also brought up an excellent point about one all too frequently occurring situation that I would immediately set about rectifying, at least, in part, if should I win the lottery tomorrow. Attenborough’s words explain it best: ‘It’s not a question of enough plays being done, it’s a question of not enough plays being re-done, so they get a life…So often writers see their plays explode and subsidized ticket prices are making it run, or the theatre wouldn’t run and then, it’s gone.’ It’s actually about, ‘allowing the plays to enter the culture.’

A case in point which sadly, but aptly illustrated this unfortunate point was the Bush Theatre’s recent smash hit production of Mike Packer’s bitingly aware, hilariously truthful play tHe dYsFUnCKshOnaiZ! Which, had its audiences laughing and talking to one another about it at the interval as well as for ages afterwards. Charles Spencer vigorously backed up this high level audience appreciation of the production, indicating in his review of the play that West End producers should quickly take note of it. We, and our reviewer, who was as enthusiastic about it as the audiences we were part of were, agree!

In his closing remark, director Hall chose to champion the wide ranging variety of theatrical offerings in London, emphasizing his earlier praise by stating that we should ‘celebrate that.’

Friedman was her usual verbose self in her conclusions, confirming that she has ‘more plays than she can do’ on her list of potential productions, reiterating that there are ‘challenges’ in terms of ‘how to produce them.’ Her final remarks contained a note of warning for West End theatre practioners. ‘We can continue to flourish, but we need to shift and change as the culture is changing to bring audiences to us.’

Throughout the discussion, Guardian theatre critic and author Michael Billington had comfortably chaired the panel, interjecting comments and steering commentary as he saw fit. One line of talk had lead to the prospect of another which, though not necessarily conjoined, was always, related.

Although the over-riding conclusion of both panel and chair was that plays are indeed, alive and well in London’s Theatre-land, there was also a general consensus that tickets for West End shows are over-priced, although in producer Friedman’s experienced estimation, sporadic lowering of ticket prices in the past seems to have produced little or no improvement in over-all attendance figures, at least not to a level that would make cheaper tickets seem like a viable enough option for permanent instigation. Today’s manufactured star process, especially that via television, also tends to create difficulties, in terms of such ‘stars’ sometimes being too green, when it comes to theatrical training, and/or experience to be able to shine.

Rather puzzlingly, SOLT’s ‘official half-price ticket booth in Leicester Square, TKTS, was never offered as an alternative to oft mentioned high ticket prices. For more information on TKTS and what’s on sale each day check http://www.officiallondontheatre.co.uk/tkts/leicester_square Tickets are available through SOLT’s official half-price booth for shows being staged at West End, as well as Off West End Theatres, such as the Almeida, and they also sell tickets for ENO productions, (English National Opera) as available. Weekday and Saturday hours: 10am to 7pm and 11am to 4pm Sundays - Bare in mind that most theatres are ‘dark’ on Sundays!

It was also never supposed, even in a hypothetical sense, that younger theatre-goers (18-30), whom, it was mentioned, tend to go to ‘the theatre’ less frequently, are perhaps, at least in our own experience, more likely to be in attendance on a more regular basis at any of London’s rich range of Fringe Theatres, many of whom offer a wide-ranging variety of productions, often featuring fine acting and directing, which, between them, encompasses a canny mix of revivals and new writing as well as ‘devised’ theatre.

All of the aforementioned theatre-going options, relating to London’s fringe theatre circuit, which were left unmentioned in the ‘debate’ propels one to wonder why casting directors don’t go out on the ‘fringe’ with more regularly when seeking new talent, aka up and coming ‘stars’ and/or searching for just the right seasoned actors to fit into their productions, as many of the productions we’ve seen on the fringe theatre circuit over the years feature an amazing assortment of high caliber actors of all ages, types and levels of experience! Methinks the powers that be in theatre-land all too often underestimate the power of fringe theatre as a collective force for inspiration and motivation, as well as entertainment and education, which, in our techno age still tends to be promoted most widely via word of mouth!

It has to be added in conclusion, as well, that many theatres, of both the West End and Off West End variety tend to offer sizeable concessions to students and younger/older theatre-goers, and group discounts can sometimes be a viable option too, in cases when a number (usually smaller in count than one might suppose) of people wish to attend productions with normally out of range ticket prices. Last, but not least, don’t forget that many theatres, the NT among them, offer ‘Day Seats’ which are generally first and second row, for a tenner and/or standby concessions for those who are willing to queue up on the morning, (you get two chances for tickets on matinee days) or half hour before the play begins respectively. In any event, it’s always wise to ask the box office for suggestions.

Happy Theatre-Going!

To celebrate theatre past and present, SOLT has joined forces with major performing arts events, festivals and theatres across London. See www.officiallondontheatreguide.co.uk for information on more Centenary events.

Celebrate the Play: Spotlight on Drama

Royal Court Theatre

May 7, 2008

Chair

Michael Billington

Longest-serving contemporary London drama critic. Since 1971 Michael has been the theatre critic for The Guardian and has written several books including State Of The Nation which won Theatre Book of the Year Award from the Society for Theatre Research.

Panelists

Roy Williams

Writer in Residence at the Almeida Theatre. Roy is also writing new plays for the Royal Court, Polka Theatre, Out of Joint, the RSC, Almeida and the National Theatre. His latest play Baby Girl premiered at the National Theatre in April 2008.

Sonia Friedman

Having produced over 75 new productions since 1990, Sonia is regularly credited in the media as one of the most powerful and influential producers in British Theatre. Sonia is also producer and co-founder of Out of Joint, one of Britain’s leading theatre companies and is currently production That Face at the Duke of York Theatre.

Michael Attenborough

Took up the helm of the Almeida Theatre in 2002 as Artistic Director. Prior to joining, Michael was Principal Associate Director of the Royal Shakespeare Company from 1990 to 2002 whereupon leaving he was invited to become an Honorary Associate Artist. Michael has also worked with the Hampstead Theatre, Young Vic, Palace Theatre (Watford), West Yorkshire Playhouse and the Mercury Theatre (Colchester). Rosmersholm previews at the Almeida from May 15.

Edward Hall

Winner of two TMA Awards, two time Lawrence Olivier Award nominee and nominee for the Drama Desk Award in New York, Edward Hall has directed a number of shows which have toured nationally and internationally. Edward is currently directing Deep Blue Sea at the Vaudeville.

Peter Gill

Playwright and director of over 80 shows Peter has enjoyed a glittering career working with many of the world’s leading theatres. Peter Gill became an Assistant Director of the Royal Court in 1964 and then an Associate Director in 1970. He was the founding Director of Riverside Studios in 1976, became Associate Director of the NT (1980-97) and founding Director of the NT Studio (1984-90). His revival of Small Change (1976)is now on at the Donmar Warehouse.

Reviewers

M.Couzens Reviews