October 2008 Archives

Following Arts Council England’s spending review debacle in late 2007, belief in the funding body dropped faster than share prices on Black Friday. Equity delivered a vote of no confidence against ACE at ‘the meeting’ in January at the Young Vic, there was damning criticism about the lack of transparency of its decision making process from across the board, and two small organisations even attempted to take their fight to court.

Former National Theatre and Royal Opera House executive Genista McIntosh - who was commissioned to undertake an independent report on ACE’s handling of the funding overhaul - summed up the problem quite simply in her final verdict.

She said: “ACE needs to remember that it is not a regulator of the arts sector, even though it has a responsibility for public funds. It should be an advocate, enabler, supporter, developer, critical friend - but not a policeman.”

Earlier this week her words were echoed by a panel of industry heavy-weights - Lyric Hammersmith outgoing artistic director David Farr, National Theatre associate director Tom Morris, Goldsmith’s College Fine Art lecturer Richard Noble and playwright and satirist Alistair Beaton - at a debate on whether artists should elect their own parliament.

The questions under consideration were -

Does anyone still respect ACE, or is it a dated bureaucracy?

Is it time artists took the distribution of public funds into their own hands and revitalise public provision for the arts by forming their own parliament?

Would this create a new set of cliques and covert interests? Or, would the parliament collapse under the weight of its own self-importance?

Aptly the event took place at the Young Vic, seemingly now the unofficial hotspot for ACE-bashing since the aforementioned meeting.

The dance industry has received a kick up the proverbial from Action for Children’s Arts vice chair Vicky Ireland, in response to their concerns over the lack of work being made for young audiences.

Speaking at the Children Will Listen debate, Ireland called on the sector to develop cross artform links and actually engage with children in order to strengthen the future of the sector.

She said: “You need respect for children and for dance, and then you need respect for dance for children. Part of the problem is that people haven’t seen or talked to children for a long time.”

Brave words for a woman surrounded by a room full of dance practitioners, but perhaps also welcome, given that she was one of the few at the debate actually suggesting a way forward.

But is it so easy?

For Royal Opera House creative associate Will Tuckett, Sadler’s Wells producer Emma Gladstone and director of London Contemporary Dance School Veronica Lewis, the problem goes much deeper. Namely that choreographers and dancers are reluctant to get involved in dance shows for kids for fear of being “ghettoised”.

If this is true, surely the way forward is to find ways to battle this perception?

If the lack of dance work for youngsters could see the artform falling behind theatre and music, maybe it is time for dance schools to develop a greater focus on children’s works within their courses for dancers and choreographers?

Or should institutions bump up the amount they invest in shows for youngsters and families, to raise their profile and lure in more choreographers?

Now that the problem is out there and the concerns have been raised, it is time for the dance industry to come up with a plan of action… or convince a few high profile choreographers to start a new trend.

The Hippodrome was once one of London’s grandest live entertainment venues. Houdini performed here and there used to be massive spectaculars involving elephants, seals, ostriches, zebras - in fact, name an exotic animal and it has probably trod the boards at the Hippodrome.

For those of us with memories which don’t go back to the beginning of the 20th century - and I’m guessing that if you’re reading this blog that probably means you - you’re most likely to either know it as the home of cabaret show Talk of the Town. Or, if you’re memory doesn’t stretch back to 1982 (when Talk shut), then you might have had the ill fortune of wandering into one of its many incarnations as a discotheque/nightclub.

This week, then, has been rather a momentous one in terms of the history of this venue. It has reopened as a theatre for the first time since 1982.

The show with which it has reopened is La Clique - a blend of cabaret, circus and burlesque, featuring puppeteers, a contortionist, juggling, aerial work, hula hoops and a rather naughty number involving a disappearing hanky. It is a marvelous night out at the theatre - very much in the old vein of a variety show - and it deserves to run and run.

Of course, that would be wonderful not only for the show itself (and its producers and performers of course) but also for the Hippodrome, which would have been reborn as a live entertainment venue.

Alas, though, there are dark clouds on the horizon.

There have been plans to turn the site into a casino for some time. This hasn’t happened yet because the operators in question have been unable to gain a gaming licence.

That has all changed. As of last Friday, they have one.

It’s now only a matter of time before the Hippodrome is converted into a casino, thus - it would seem - dashing any hopes of the site being revived as a centre for live entertainment on a permanent basis.

But, is it really the end of the line? Well, perhaps not.

The gaming operator in question - United Leisure Gaming - is apparently looking at retaining some live entertainment on site. What this will be exactly is currently unclear.

If that is the case - and it would seem like a very sensible proposal - then long-term it might actually be the saving of this variety theatre. Shows and gaming mix in Las Vegas, there’s no reason they can’t mix in Leicester Square.

Only time will tell. In the meantime, go and see La Clique - not only is it a wonderful show, but it might be your last chance to see the Hippodrome in use as it was originally intended.

With newspapers reporting daily of the worsening global financial situation it’s only natural that we in the theatre world should start wondering about how it is going to affect us?

Will people start reigning back their spending on theatre tickets as they attempt to save the pennies with the cost of day-to-day necessities ever increasing?

Will investors in commercial theatre disappear after losing money on investments elsewhere, or in failed banks?

Will the subsidised sector suffer as the government slashes its expenditure in ‘non-essential’ areas such as the arts?

Will corporate sponsors of arts events disappear?

Interesting to note this week that the Northcott Theatre in Exeter is to become the latest in a string of regional theatres to do away with the post of artistic director.

As part of a major re-organisation of the venue, it will now be led by a chief executive and ‘creative director’, which sounds rather like the ‘creative producer’ role which has been cropping up at other theatres across the country.

According to said chief executive Kate Tyrell:

“We don’t need an artistic director in the way that we have before. The post we’re going to appoint is a creative who will programme visiting companies , produce incoming companies and work with associate directors, who will direct the work.”

It looks like it’s finally over. After 16 months of wrangling, haranguing and probably occasional straightforward negotiation, it looks as if (fingers crossed, touch wood) we finally have a new pay deal for actors and stage management working in the West End.

The details of the deal are here and there’s more in this week’s print edition of The Stage, but the gist of it is that casts will get a much increased minimum wage in return for working on Sundays and giving up a number of extra payments which they are currently entitled to.

Who, though, is the big winner in all of this?