As a professional theatregoer – one who has made going to the theatre not only my passion but also my job – nothing irritates me more often than my fellow audience members. Of course the theatre doesn’t exist without them – this is not, after all, something I can do alone like painting or is something designed for my sole pleasure! – so I need to get over my narcissistic tendencies, as my psychotherapist friend Dr Barbra Devere would say. And maybe I have become over-sensitive and too finely tuned to distraction over the years.
I’ve certainly got my antennae on alert for where the problems might come from. My heart often sinks, for instance, at the sight of school parties – even as I realise that it was going to the theatre as part of a school party myself, aged around 14, that turned me on to the theatre in the first place. Perhaps there’s a budding me amongst them (yes, Dr Barbra, I can see the narcissism again). Or very young children with their parents: the parents usually being the problem here (it’s when parents feel it is necessary to keep up a running commentary with their children and keep a constant dialogue going that problems arise; it’s the parents, not the kids, who do the talking). Or, God forbid, babes in arms – how can they possibly be expected not to cry? (Yet in Providence, Rhode Island, legislators are actually even now considering a bill to enable mothers who are breastfeeding their infants, under 1 years old, to bring them to the theatre and other live performances for free. Myself, I’m the US politician who told the Providence Journal this week, “They should be paying double for the disturbance they’re creating”).
Then there are the sweet wrapper brigade, and once again, shame falls on the theatres that actually sell the crinkly sort. Heavens, Live Nation’s theatres even sell popcorn. (Imagine sitting in front of someone munching popcorn through a show; it’s bad enough when it happens at the cinema). And of course, there’s the perennial problem of mobile phones that are not only left on to ring (and yes, I’ve previously blogged that I did this myself not too long ago; heck, I can even irritate myself!), but are actually sometimes answered. Or people who keep up texting through a show (I’ve previously blogged about how I once saw the artistic director of Dublin’s Gate Theatre doing this throughout a Donmar Warehouse Chekhov first night). The list goes on.
I can see that theatres want to be inclusive and tick as many access boxes as possible, but my 250-mile round trip to Derby yesterday to see a very good new production of Into the Woods was very nearly ruined by the theatre’s own rather over-zealous attempts to do so. Under the EDS Hot Tickets scheme – a programme of audience development that seeks to bring people who may have never been to the live theatre before – a group of severely mentally disabled people were admitted in wheelchairs, and their chorus of involuntary yelps and moans kept punctuating the action. But Sondheim’s songs require a concentration, on both the part of the performer and audience, that are fatally disturbed by such intrusions. When the frequency and volume of the moans increased to such a pitch that it was impossible to ignore them anymore, I finally left the auditorium to find a house manager to deal with it, who was apparently in her office. In the interval, it was explained to me that the theatre’s community liaison department had discussed the possible disruptions with the party’s leader in advance, but they couldn’t be known as the party hadn’t been to the theatre before.
But the theatre could and should have taken more responsibility for the rest of their paying audience: why wasn’t the situation being monitored inside the auditorium by the house manager? It shouldn’t have taken my intervention to finally get it sorted out.
I really enjoy reading this blog, but I think its far more important that theatre reaches as wide an audience as possible. I know harking back to tradition isn't a great rhetorical device; but when I went on the tour at the Globe, they made a big point of the chaos that wouls happen during the performance 'back in the day'. If disabled people got to see theatre - that's fantastic, if it disturbed you its a shame, but I think perhaps more your problem than theirs.
Mark Shenton you should be ashamed of yourself! How dare you criticise people who have disabilities, they have a much right to go to the theatre any one of us and enjoy themselves! Just because you think you have the divine right as a theatre critic to critise productions, what right does this give you to critice people who are less fortunate than yourself. All shows "require a level of concentration, on both the part of the performer and audience", not just Sondhiem shows, so please don't hide behind this self oppinionated quote. You are being totaly discriminitive against this group of people. I wonder if your reaction would have been the same had it not been a Sondhein show?
I think you should think about this next time you decide to get on your Sondheim snobbery horse and remember theatre is for all.
And I think that Derby should be praised for being part of this scheme and again not critised by you.
I was not in any way criticising people with disabilities (patronisingly labelled here "people who are less fortunate than yourself") -- I was critising the theatre for the way it was dealt with. Theatrical etiquette should not demand that exceptions be made for particular sections of its audience: a certain standard of behaviour is required for fellow patrons to be able to enjoy the performance, and if these are breached -- by, in this case, constant moans that could be heard throughout the auditorium -- it needs to be dealt with. Perhaps a special performance needs to be designated, like signed-interpreted or audio-described performances, for which audience members would know in advance that distractions were likely to occur and could make up their own minds whether to attend. Otherwise, theatregoers -- who have paid good money for their entertainment -- are being discriminated against and having their enjoyment compromised in favour of a few members of the audience behaving in ways that potentially destroy the production. And this applies to any show, not just Sondheim, for the record.
Excuse me, but I was not patronising anyone!, you were the one that called them 'mentally disabled', the term these days is 'people with special needs' and you really should re-read what you have written for you are being so decriminating saying that these audience members ahould have their own performances and not be allowed to mix with, as you call them 'theatregoers -who have paid good money...' are these people not theatregoers who have also paid good money? And why should a theatre warn you about audience members before you go in to a performance for then they would also be seen to be dicscriminating!
Theatre is for all and should not be a place where individuals decide who should be able to sit in an audience and at what performance. And you as a 'voice' in theatre should be championing this.
Ah, the standby of blog writers, the polemical post designed to encourage lots of comments. OK Mark, I'll take the bait and add mine.
Firstly, never run around the theatre looking for people to complain to. Prior to the performance make sure you have saved the telephone number of the theatre into your mobile and phone from the comfort of your seat. As you were disturbed during the first act, for the musical 'Into the Woods' I would suggest during 'On the Steps of the Palace' would be an appropriate place to phone in your complaint.
Secondly, you have not mentioned one of the worst banes of the modern theatregoer - obese people. They take up far more seat than they have paid for. I find this particular problem worse on Broadway than the West End.
Other than that an enjoyable post. It 'ticked a lot of boxes'.
I'm not going to take the obvious bait, but instead rail against the parental commentary jibe. One of the most extraordinary nights I've ever spent in a theatre was next to a father who translated the entirety of As You Like It so his accompanying 7-year-old daughter could understand it. Not only was she enthralled and delighted, I benefitted from a magical and illuminating interpretation of the play that enhanced my enjoyment of the production immensely and allowed me to vicariously experience the excitement of live theatre through the wide-eyed joy of a child.
Theatre is a live, experiential medium. What happens in the auditorium is as much part of the event as the action on stage. That was the show you saw Mark - commentary, sweet rustling, 'moans' and all. If you don't like it live, rent a DVD.
Oh, and why is it always freeloading theatre critics who roll out the "paid good money" line? As if you weren't in on a comp.
Seems odd to me that people are so willing to allow the reason they have gone to the theatre -- to see a show -- to be compromised by the behaviour of others. None of this would be tolerated at a classical music concert, say: it's entirely accepted there that people have come to listen to the music, *not* the moans, commentary and sweet rustling of fellow theatregoers, who ever they are! The "live and let live" philosphy that suggests everyone has an EQUAL right to their behaviour, however much it compromises the rights of others, means that instead of banning smoking in public places, for instance, as will shortly be happening, we should allow it in the theatre. As for good money: I might not, it's true, have paid for my ticket -- but I paid a lot of money to get there. And no one reimburses me...
You know what, you are absolutely right! Having worked in the West End for a good ten or twelve years as an usher and fire officer in between acting work I can safely say that your blog is spot on! Parents are an absolute pain in the neck, tourists are worse, pensioners should not be allowed to leave their homes and PHYSICALLY IMPAIRED people should stop complaining and recognise the obvious fact that they do have a disability. Parents are always lording it up in front of their embarressed kids while they try to choke down as much booze as possible, pensioners make a God awful mess wherever they go, tourists are always late to the show and the disabled always insist on sitting exactly where they can disrupt everyone elses enjoyment of the show.
The only God send are teenagers. They dont drink, keep quiet and have nothing to prove.
I am torn both ways on this discussion. When I saw Anything Goes at the Theatre Royal Drury Lane we had a young man in a wheel chair nearby in front. Everytime any big dance sections happened he would start waving his arms and legs everywhere. I am thrilled for him that he had such a good time but for me it rather ruined the show to have so much disruption in front of me. In a way I can forgive it becaue he was not in control but was it really fair to others around him that their enjoyment was affected?
I accompanied Mark Shenton on his trip to Derby to see INTO THE WOODS in the Playhouse (I was, in fact, the ‘driver’!). It was me who convinced Mark to come with me and most certainly he was not paid by anyone to go there as a critic. I have been an ‘amateur’ theatre goer for over 40 years and a Sondheim fanatic, so I guess I can also be accused of ‘Sondheim snobbery’.
I am not in the habit of contributing to blogs but some of the ridiculous comments made, particularly by Gerald Fairbank, have made me post this. To say that the catch all term ‘people with special needs’ should be used is PC gone mad. The carers themselves used the term ‘mentally disabled’ and nobody can accuse them of insensitivity. The truth of the matter is that we were sitting a couple of rows in front of the group and the involuntary noises made by quite a number of them were very loud and fairly continuous and, to be honest, my first thoughts were more for the performers on stage than for the audience. People that know me would vouch that I am a champion for handicapped people, or as Mr Faibank puts it, ‘people who are less fortunate’ than myself. I am all for giving EVERYONE a chance to see live theatre performances. However, on this occasion it was the FIRST TIME that this group attended a live performance of any kind. It would have been much better for the theatre to have invited them to one of the rehearsals, to ‘test the water’ and judge the reaction before attending a full blown public performance. It did not advance the cause of mentally handicapped people one iota, as everybody was put out, INCLUDING the group in question and the carers. Dare I suggest that the sanctimonious people making some of the comments would have been equally put out?
As already mentioned this would NOT have been tolerated at a classical concert. I attended such a concert some years back when a significant number of the audience had a sudden coughing fit. The conductor STOPPED the music for 5 minutes to allow everybody to recover, as he said that it was very difficult to continue with that level of disturbance.
As a parent and grandparent, I feel that to advocate a ‘free for all’ as far as children/young people attending theatre are concerned only explains the current unacceptable behaviour of some young people. Thank God not all. Attending the INTO THE WOODS performance was a large group of schoolgirls (about 13-14 years old) who behaved beautifully, still reacting exuberantly to what was going on stage. While on the subject, I am pleased that Jamie had such an ‘extraordinary’ night listening to the father translating As You Like It to his 7-year old daughter. The way I did it with my children was to PREPARE them in ADVANCE of attending a theatre performance, so that they know what to expect and not to put them in a position that they feel awkward because they attract attention during the performance.
Dan - I think you should take a long hard look at yourself in the mirror. You've clearly charged Mark way over the odds for shared petrol to Derby. Unless you were driving a Hummer, it can't have cost more than £20 each. Yet judging by Mark's post, he paid you a great deal more than that to get there and it's weighed heavy on his mind ever since. You might have known that no-one was going to reimburse him.
If you are going to rip Mark off for petrol money, do let Derby Playhouse know in advance in future. I'm sure they'll cancel block bookings from undesirable paying customers so Mark can enjoy his freebie in peace.
Whilst I'm perfectly amenable to old people, young people and people with disabilities attending the theatre, I CANNOT STAND PEOPLE WHO USE CAPITAL LETTERS IN BLOG POSTINGS TO HAMMER HOME THEIR POINT OF VIEW. Anyone with a vague understanding of web etiquette knows it's rude to use capitals. Kind of like making noise at the theatre, to draw an arbitrary analogy. I'd forgive your ignorance, except I feel one fascistic demand for observance of etiquette deserves another.
HI JAMIE,
I DID SAY THAT I DON’T CONTRIBUTE TO BLOGS SO I AM NOT AWARE OF WEB ETIQUETTE, SIMILARLY TO YOU BEING ignorant OF THEATRE ETIQUETTE. NOT ONLY DID I RIP MARK OFF FOR PETROL MONEY, I ALSO RIPPED HIM OFF FOR MEALS, ETC. HE JUST LOVES MY COMPANY!
I DID WHAT YOU SAID AND LOOKED AT THE MIRROR THIS MORNING. I RATHER LIKED WHAT I SAW!!! SORRY, ARE EXCLAMATION MARKS ALLOWED ON A BLOG?
I DON’T KNOW HOW OLD YOU ARE, BUT IF YOU ARE RATHER YOUNG I AM PLEASED THAT THE FUTURE OF THE COUNTRY IS GOOD HANDS.BY THE WAY, I HATE PEOPLE THAT HIDE BEHIND FIRST NAMES ONLY.
I think that there's a world of difference between unwitting distractions, such as the behaviour of the group you describe, and those caused by ignorance or indifference to how one's actions affect others (talkers, texters, munchers, etc.). That said, I'm sorry you had a bad time, but doesn't the good (mentally challenged group experiences good live theatre) outweigh the bad in this case? Just saying. :)
While this debate has been mostly "I'm right" or "you're wrong", like most things this isn't a black and white issue.
If one of the objectors to this post was at the theatre and someone "less fortunate than themselves" was making so much noise that much of the audience couldn't hear a word of what was being said on stage, I think they'd be more likely to protest, no matter how much this less fortunate person was enjoying themselves.
Similarly, if the people in Mark's post were only occasionally making a murmur, I doubt he'd have a problem with their presence.
I don't think any of us can judge exactly how we'd feel without having been witness to the events Mark describes. You can disapprove, but unless you know how disruptive this was, it's a bit much to offer an outraged dismissal and say anything goes.
The most basic point is, How do they know the mentally disturbed ARE enjoying being at the theatre? If they are yelping and moaning, they may well be frightened or bored. God knows I have felt like yelping and moaning at some of the things I have had to see. But why do people who have paid for their tickets and the actors who need all the concentration they can get have to suffer so that some dull people with only their sanctimony to make them feel superior to others can do so.
The main issue, surely, is one of convention..?
It is a convention of live theatre, in general, that the audience is usually required to sit in the dark in relative silence(laughter and applause permitted) for the duration of the performance.
Hard though it may sound, the carers or relatives of anyone likely to break that convention has a duty to ensure that they can conform.
This would, I'm afraid, encompass children..seniors and yes some disabled as well..!!
If the patron wishes to spend the afternoon or evening eating sweets and/or ice cream...talking loudly or being restless in a manner that might disturb others then they should go, or be taken, to a different entertainment medium.
a theme park...a sports match...a garden centre...a country park...or any number of other places where a "silent" requirement is not mandatory.
I speak as an, all too often disturbed, paying patron.
I'm sorry, I have no particular predjudice but if I have to play by the rules then so should others
how monumentally depressing.
thankfully, civilisation has a habit of breaking with convention. hence women now have the vote, slavery is generally frowned upon and children are rarely employed as chimney sweeps.
who knows...maybe disabled people will one day be able to go to the theatre.
How ridiculous!
Shenton, and anyone else has a perfect right to ask to enjoy theatre, or any other experience in the conditions in which it is meant to be experinced.
There was no hint of descrimination in his R4 interview - he didn't appear to know or care who was making the disturbance. Surely it would be desciminatory for him, or anyone else, to not voice an objection to disruption on grounds of special needs?
Clearly the fault here is with the carer who misjudjed the capacity of their charges and took them to a performance where behaviour was expected that they could not conform to? The truth of this is attested to in that the majority of the party returned days later for the whole performance.
As Mr Shenton said, many performance spaces run special performances for children/special needs/audio description/signing where a different level of behaviour is expected and entirely acceptable.
Dear Mark, thank you for highlighting an important issue. Being an important critic I am sure that the theatre would be only too pleased to invite you to the special performance held for critics known as the 'press night' - that way you would be able to avoid ordinary people and their idiosyncrasies.
It is disturbing to the highest degree that an obvious theatre lover should object to others enjoying themsleves, especially mentioning disabled people in such a antiquated and ignorant wayway. The theatre is for everyone - sadly to say it is the attitudes of people that often prevent Disabeld people enjoying the same human rights as other citizens - if you take Mark's thoughts further you will see that he advocates for an elitist minority to attend what is essentailly a public service. Come on - move on and see the world is full of difference - difference in how we enjoy the arts, in our expressions and reactions to what we experience. I feel the article is rather pointedly showing how our history of exclusion and oppression has meant that when we do show up - people do not know how to handle us and take offense, and as in Mark's article also assess our understanding of work in the most profane way possible [i.e. the phrases he uses which I dare not repeat]. I think it is great that theatres are working to be more accessible - I think it is time to see that the world is changing and to exclude people 'cos you are not used to them or easily distracted needs you examine your attititudes and acknowledge that something more important is taking place as more and more people are accessing live art - just get off your high horse and stop thinking we all expereince theatre in the same way. Oh, and by the way - I am a disabled person and you won't keep me out!!
This blog typifies the discrimination disabled people face from the arts establishment and elite and its resistance to ordinary people finally gaining access to this big comfortable club that it has dominated for years. Finally the wretched, unwashed are being encouraged to participate and as soon as they do, hands fly up and voices are raised, or whispered should I say.
You simply cannot stop disabled people going to the theatre or gallery anymore because you are uncomfortable in their presence.
If involuntary noise is a consequence of a person’s impairment and they can’t control this, then we need to accommodate this, not force the person to modify their behaviour or otherwise chuck them out. This is what disables people.
If you find the chorus of involuntary yelps and moans disruptive, perhaps you should leave the theatre. You certainly shouldn’t expect the disabled person, because they are, through no fault of there own, making you feel uncomfortable to upsticks doff their hat and wander meekly off.
Its about human rights and as a professional theatre goer you must have seen a lot of work that tackles these issues has non of it rubbed of. To suggest a “special night” often called a ghetto is to deny these rights. It’s a public building, a public performance paid for by public money that members of the public have a right to access.
Plus if I where a manager at Derby I would be deeply insulted by your accusation that I was ticking access boxes. Maybe just maybe, someone is finally trying to do the right thing.
Oh dear, Mr Shenton, you are a little outdated as to who theatre is for. As a disabled artist (not special, challenged or any other label you may give me) I sincerely hope that I never here your grubby little pencil scratching your sad thoughts in one of my shows. you will be asked to leave and come back when you have learnt to be the same as everyone else. By the way signed and audio described performances are usually open to all. Maybe just a little more inclusive than perhaps Mr Shenton would wish for.
Right, I am going to put in my two penn'orth, now. you will note that I am not "hiding" behind using just my first name.
I am a disabled person. I have been known to make "involuntary noises" because I am emotional, and that's what I'm like. Who hasn't gasped, or possibly said something a little too loudly in the heat of the moment?
I'm sure that Mr Shenton has sneezed or coughed more than once in a performance? Surely that, too is an involuntary noise and can be very disturbing, and often loud, but people put up with it because it can't be helped. He even alludes to this himself.
This is the point - it cannot be helped.
Disabled people are, generally, restricted enough in terms of where we can sit - particularly wheelchair users, so why should we be further ghettoised?
I should like to point out that some of the language on this blog should be banned as all bad language should be. You wouldn't swear on here (I hope) so why should you insult us? Terms such as "mentally disturbed" (which is also inaccurate) and even "special needs" which was supposedly a good term to use are not acceptable within the disabled community. We are disabled people, not just "disabled".
Please, let's get into the 21st century and have some tolerance.
I, too get annoyed by kiddies and coughers but I certainly wouldn't leave because of them. That is, assuming I could leave - as a wheelchair user I may have to sit in a seat and wait for my wheelchair to be brought to me. I bet you'd enjoy that disruption......
I regularly arrange trips to the theatre for members of a drama group of people with learning difficulties (not severely mentally disabled, nor having special needs). We go to performances to be delighted, amazed, shocked, amused, entralled, inspired...the same reasons as everybody else. We see oursleves as bona fide members of the theatrical community and have always felt entirely at home there. Never have I been asked on booking to prophesy whether the people coming with me would be able to behave appropriately. Were I to be asked to make such a prophesy I would take great exception to it as other disabled people have demonstrated by previous posts. It is far more difficult for us to arrange such an outing, to source adequate transport, find a venue with enough spaces for the people using wheelchairs, provide personal assistance and in some cases to secure the consent of family members, that it is for you to bung your mate a few quid and get him to give you a lift. . If we are then made to feel uncomfortable or unwelcome by those with elitist attitudes the sense of exclusion is all the more enhanced because of the effort most disabled people have to make to get there in the first place. Some people who 'yelp and moan' have unimpaired intellectual function, perhaps you didn't know this. They will be only too aware of being seen as a nuisance. But why should you concern yourself about their hurt feelings\? and if they do have learning difficulties, well, as Paddy Masefield points out, they are the 'most often insulted' group in society. What difference does one more insult make?
I was under the impression that the role of a Theatre Critic (if that is what you are) was to report on the quality of the performance being reviewed, what the building, it's facilities, quality of acting, how effective the stage design was in relation to what is being performed and did other people also enjoy what they were seeing. Who else was attending during the performance, is of no relevence whatsoever. Some people attend preformances purely because 'X' will be there or has been, which to me, reeks of the worst form of social snobbery.
I do not think the Great Bard at the Globe theatre, niggled about whom attended, and indeed the theatres then accepted whoever came thought their doors be they in their greatest finery, rags or sackcloth and ashes.
Can we have segregated performances for tall people? As a paying theatre goer, I can't see past them, and they disrupt my enjoyment of the performance. And they'd probably be better off going to a performance that was tailored to suit their individual needs.
Can we also have segregated performances for people with big hair? See above.
And segregated performances for people with B.O?
And segregated performances for mouth breathers/people with colds?
Hey, why don't we have segregated shows for non-white people, in case the colour of their skin offends any paying theatre goers and disrupts their enjoyment of the performance.
Or, why not segregated performances for gay people? Heck, why not segregated shows for women too, because they're bound to be pre-menstrual and moody. A "special" performance might be better for them.
Everyone has a right to go to the theatre, and yes we mums do keep up a commentary to our children, it's how they learn !
Your comments are uneducated and unfortunate.