Britain’s regional theatres have enjoyed a renaissance in the last decade or so, with many putting themselves firmly back on the theatrical map after years of chronic under-funding was finally reversed; but now the promise of lottery-funded refurbishments seems to be taking priority over artistic achievement. Last December, I reported here how Sheffield parted ways with Sam West, despite the excellent work he’d been doing in his two years there, when the board decided to shut down producing operations while the Crucible was closed for refurbishment rather than continue its artistic programme elsewhere, as the Young Vic successfully did during its refurbishment.
Now comes the news that Bristol Old Vic is following suit, with the announcement yesterday that artistic director Simon Reade is to step down in June following what a press release calls “the Bristol Old Vic Board’s decision to take the earliest opportunity to refurbish its historic theatre building”.
But just how early is this opportunity in fact being taken? The Old Vic has a producing programme that’s currently scheduled (according to the company website) through to September 22. But who runs the theatre after June 2, when Simon leaves?
And while Sheffield had long advanced plans to refurbish its theatre, this is the first I’ve heard of Bristol planning to do the same thing. How far advanced are these plans? When will building commence? Or is the building simply being mothballed?
The Arts Council, as funders of the theatre, need to be asked whether they’re there to fund empty buildings, or ones with thriving artistic policies. (Of course, open buildings can be empty, too, as we know from too many theatres up and down the country). But hard questions need to be asked here, since Bristol – once a template for the regeneration of British theatre – could be a worrying sign of the beginnings of its destruction. Talent like Simon Reade shouldn’t be squandered and lost in a drive to rebuild the bricks and mortar, because without an artistic soul, the theatre is nothing.
It is indeed worrying that the BOV is to close so hurriedly, and that so many staff are to be made redundant. However it is surely good news that the shallow pseudo-"new labour" Simon Reade is to go as his brief reign there has been an unmitigated disaster, although heavily talked up by himself and former side kick David Farr who seemily spent the first year of their term rubbishing the past history off the BOV.
Reade and Farr started well, but when their partnership broke down things went sour pretty quickly. In the last two years there have been vast problems with the staff, almost all of whom found Reade to be a difficult, uninspired and lacklustre leader.
Threats of job losses have been looming over almost all the staff for months. Reade himself has been responsible for booking some awful theatre, from terrible Christmas shows to the disastrous recent Dr Faustus.
It came as the final insult to many staff that Reade didn't even turn up at the emergency company meeting where the shock announcement was made - instead, almost unbelievably, his wife (acting in a current production) was handed a sealed letter to open and read in front of the company. What a joke!
When Reade and Farr took over, they inherited national-class costume, carpentry, technical and educational departments. Reade leaves the theatre with expectations that when it reopens there will be '12 - 15' staff, down from 45! What a tragedy.
Instead of being lauded as 'talent' or, as the Evening Post put it, 'one of the country's top theatre producers', Simon Reade should be held up as an example of shocking leadership in the Arts. The man should go back to writing, where he had some success, rather than trying to run an institution. He was the wrong man for the job, and up to 30 permanent staff members are paying the price for his failure.
It is unsurprising that Simon Reade is to leave Bristol Old Vic. He has single handedly ruined a great venue by losing the goodwill of audiences and the arts community in the Bristol area. I wonder if there is more to the board's decision that meets the eye? Many of us have wondered for sometime why the board have continued to support a man who has failed to show any directing talent, failed to offer any meaningful support for local work and reduced an education department to its knees. It is amazing that Reade (and Farr) managed to court such favour from the arts press when they were more interested in their own careers than the development of a regional theatre. I look at other theatres in this area and see amazing work being done on a fraction of the budget of BOV. As a local teacher I am more likely to see great work at The Tobacco Factory in Bristol, The Rondo in Bath or The Egg in Bath. Lets hope the board look to organisations like these for the blueprint for its re-opening. Let's also hope Reade isn't allowed to run any theatre again.
No plans appear to have been made to carry on the work of the BOV during the closure as usually happens during refurbishments. The loss of the craftspeople who have survived the sackings of Farr and Reade is a disaster for the creative arts in Bristol and the knock-on effect on other theatre companies will be huge.
Rumours abound that the city council was not prepared to re-licence the theatre until essential works have been carried out, but normally such closures are properly planned and there are real concerns that the board may not want to re-open the theatre as a producing house, relying instead on bought in shows. The governors should be forcibly reminded that they are responsible for the theatre as Trustees for the people of Bristol.
It is not just the directly employed staff who are affected, many smaller theatre companies rely on the practical support of the craftspeople at the BOV, use of rehearsal spaces, workshops, etc
You can be almost certain that this is the end of the BOV as a producing house.
Firstly, in 18 months, all their skilled staff will have found other jobs. Secondly, the Board have said that they plan to reopen with a staff of 12 - 15.
I'd like to see them try and run a producing theatre with a full time staff of 12 - 15. The wardrobe department alone used to have a full time staff of 6!
Reade and the board should be held to account for this appalling result.
I, like many others, greeted the news of the Bristol Old Vic Boards's snap decision to close with dismay. That the venue is in desparate need of refurbishment is beyond dispute, but the manner in which such a decision has been reached is foolhardy and insensitive to the loyal staff and the local theatre ecology.
Reactions are, understandably, quite bitter, but there is a risk of getting caught up in a witchhunt directed at Simon Reade and David Farr, when we should be questioning the actions of the Board.
Like most theatres the BOV is often in financial difficulties (although no doubt its current status is particularly gloomy), but to close before January 2008 and the most profitiable period of the year - especially with a season as potentially successful as the one pencilled in - shows a serious lack of character within the Board and emphasises their reactionary attitudes and ignorance of the theatre industry (I often wonder why arts boards are often dominated by people without any knowledge of arts practices). Responsibility for continuing overspends/mispends lies with the Board, yet they failed to act towards those responsible, allowing the Administrative Director (amongst other staff) to escape without blame earlier in the year and leaving Reade to take full responsibility. That no measures were taken to permanently refill the Admin Director's position suggests that maybe the decision to close earlier than expected has been in discussion for some time, and was by no means a 'snap' one. Consequently, I am amazed that the decision to close was taken without a firm strategy in place and with seasonal commitments already made. The affect on staff and visiting companies could have been eased with a longer lead time, whilst a new executive could have been employed to implement the often talked about plans to go off-site during the refurb, which have seemingly been shelved. Whatever the reasons for Simon Reade's not being present to explain the Board's decision, that no member of the Board was present either adds insult to injury and was, perhaps, one snub too far!
My fear now is that, with no committed leadership, sound artistic vision and without any firm plans in place to see the institution through the next 18(?) months of closure any previous sense of identity, good work and dedication by the staff will be completely undermined.
In addition, I would like to point out that the figure of 12-15 staff has been misinterpreted as it is a reference to the level of retained staff during the refurbishment NOT the total number of those that will be employed when the theatre reopens - this is does not negate the fact that a significant number of people will lose their jobs (many of whom I know personally), but it is incorrect to suggest there will not be openings again in the future.
Although by no means am I acting as an apologist for all of the decisions made by Reade and Farr since 2002 (I have left a more detailed response to some of the criticisms aimed at them on Lyn Gardner's blog - see URL), this situation should not be used to vilanise when it is important for us to call the Board to account for what has surely been a significant error of judgement.
I agree with Craig that the BOV board need to explain themselves, After all they are trustees for the people of Bristol. I have written to them asking for public meeting(s) to explain what is going on, and hope that others support me.
The deafening silence of the local (wholly Northcliffe owned) print media is disgraceful and the local BBC coverage has been minimal as well.
Would the Bristol Old Vic Trust Ltd Board ever reconsider? I think not! Of course they are only thinking of their own sorry little self’s at present. Simon Reade can only be held jointly responsible for this quite phenomenal catastrophe. They really have a lot to answer for. The building has been mismanaged for a long time. With the appointment of Rebecca Moreland in joint Executive position with Simon Reade surely that was a recipe for disaster! Around the country have Theatres not learnt that if an Artistic Director is also executive it leads to a conflict of interest? It seems not. Miss Moreland entered an environment that already had a destination. Not it appears that she was willing to try and head off the inevitable. It seems staff knew it and did try to bring it to the boards attention. With an out of control artistic director who made questionable decisions at every turn, without board intervention what could anyone do…. Nothing. These people are now losing their jobs. Is that right? Can this be right? The answer has to be no.
You cannot just decide that you will close for refurbishment. There are many months of planning ONCE you know you can proceed. On the theatre scene in Bristol it is common knowledge that several shows exceeded their budgets by preposterous amounts. Surely after the first time this should have been managed and the reins drawn in. The second time heads should have rolled but the third, fourth…this stinks of a financial disaster of which the only way a spineless board can react is to bury the truth and hide behind a refurbishment. Are they all so arrogant that they believe they can close the doors so quickly, and no one would smell a plague of rats? This board should not remain for this so called refurbishment. Instead a new and experienced group of people should be hunted for. If this is how they handle the closure, the staff and the numerous Theatre companies that work with the Bristol Old Vic then how the hell are they going to bring a basically unplanned, unorganised and still unfounded refurbishment to fruition. Each and every one of them should be ashamed, find a backbone and resign!!
The people of Bristol dearly want their Theatre to be a place of excellence capable of producing well into the future. This move has sullied a long awaited announcement that the Theatre Royal and New Vic Studio would get the face-lift it so badly needs to help take the Theatre back to being one of the best Reps in the country. I look forward to seeing the doors open in years to come but it looks as if it may just be a pipe dream.
According to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bristol/6645031.stm
'A public appeal will be launched later in May to raise the outstanding £2m to complete the renovation.'
The Board decision to move forward with the redevelopment by closing their building, sacking their staff, abandoning their artistic programme, and abandoning any plans to temporarily relocate while there is £2m still to find seems extraordinary.
I wonder how much public support there will be to plug that £2m gap, how many claims for unfair dismissal the theatre will face, and what the response of the Heritage Lottery Fund, Arts Council and the other funders will be. It looks like a real mess to me...
Well, something's certainly gone wrong hasn't it, and with BOV as a receiver of public funding, the public have every right to know why this closure has happened. My strong shout is that one only hopes that the Education Team at the very least are not included in the staff earmarked for redundancy. Maybe they wouldn't want to stay now, mortgages allowing, but it is entirely possible for some fantastic work to continue without the building. I'm devastated for everyone - this happens time and time again. But keep the education work going at least (they also have the power, the skills and the knowledge to utilise all the craft's people too). Don't make a terrible situation even worse. Good luck to all of you.
From the original Stage article: "Theatre officials have insisted the swift decision was made after a recent survey revealed urgent work was required on the theatre to keep it in line with health and safety standards."
Total BS! If that was the case then the building would be closed down immediately, not at the end of July! Just how stupid do they think we are? Tell the truth, ACE and the BOV board!
Is it significant that Rupert Rhymes, chairman of the Bristol Old Vic board, is also chairman of The Theatres Trust, the national advisory body for the protection and improvement of theatres? His other organisation guides theatres in planning for refurbishments, so presumambly he knows best?
I think everyone is right but somehow strangely wrong.
As far as I'm concerned, the chairman of the board is a very handsome, honest and clever fellow.
The board themselves, with their massive knowledge of theatre,have a perfect right to make such a brave decision.
The Evening Post is a beacon of the truth and the B.B.C is underfunded.
This is the best of all possible worlds, we should all go and work in the garden.
Now that the board is closing down its once-renowned company, after 64 years of repertory production, it would be a principled move to give up the name Bristol Old Vic, no longer is this deserved.The 1766 building should now revert to using its name of Theatre Royal.
As we are now being by an interim arts council administrator and not an artistic director, we certainly should not be Bristol Old Vic. There's little hope now of getting our own productions back!
As we are now being run by an interim administrator put in by the Arts Council (without advertisement - thought we were an equal opportunties employer) and not an ARTISTIC DIRECTOR, we certainly should not be Bristol Old Vic. There's little hope now of getting our own productions back! The theatre will soon be a poor sister of the Theatre Royal at Bath!
It's good to know that now the board have shut down the B,O.V.
they can go back to their day jobs. Here's to to the next ground breaking episode of Holby City, and the earth shattering description of dolylies on radio 4.
Ain't culture a wonderful thing.
It will be much better for us Bristolians if the Old Vic/Theatre Royal becomes a clone of the Bath Theatre Royal. Their programme is far superior to Bristol - the drama is high quality, usually with stars and big budgets. I gave up on the BOV years ago: the King Street theatre has long been preoccupied with the self-absorption of subsidy and artistic directors' egomania. At Bristol, there are plenty of alternatives even without going to Bath. Take the Tobacco Factory for instance - the best Shakespeare to be seen anywhere, or the Hippodrome for the top musicals. Theatregoers don't need the small beer of patronising rep nowadays.
So today's the day: the Bristol Old Vic closes.
It has been many years since the company was competently run, and now the Board are trusting in 'focus groups' to discover what they should do, and whether they should write a job description for an artistic director. Which great (or competent) resident theatre has ever been run without an artistic director? Which good theatre company has ever been run on a 'new management model'?
The present Board has displayed ineptitude of the lowest order.
All the Arts Council strategising and the engagement of business consultants gets a theatre nowehere.
Where in all this debate does the local authority feature? Nowhere! Other producing theatres work in collaboration with their city councils. Does the City Council care? It manages the Colston Hall well, so why does it not get involved?
The City Council is surely the body to sort out this mess. It should remove the board, manage the refurbishment programme directly, and recruit a new governing body led by a prominent Bristolian.
Look at West Yorkshire Playhouse, Manchester Royal Exchange Theatre, Sheffield Crucible, Birmingham Rep... all theatre with local authority integration!
Once the Council takes over the theatre,it must recruit a new Chairman and board members. They should find a new artistic director - with, of course, a competent general manager. (There has been no experienced administrator sharing the Old Vic Comoany leadership for aeons).
Only then will confidence return....
So today's the day: the Bristol Old Vic closes.
It has been some years since the company was competently run, and now the Board is trusting in 'focus groups' to discover what they should do, and whether to write a job description for an artistic director.
Which great (or competent) resident theatre has ever been run without an artistic director?
The present Board has displayed ineptitude of the lowest order. All the Arts Council strategising and business consultants get nowehere.
And where in all this debate does the local authority feature? Nowhere! Other producing theatres work in collaboration with their city councils.
Bristol City Council should intervene: remove the board, manage the refurbishment programme directly, and recruit a new governing body led by a prominent Bristolian. Only a NEW chairman and board should find a next artistic director - with, of course, a competent executive director. (There has been no experienced administrator sharing the leadership for aeons).
Look at West Yorkshire Playhouse, Manchester Royal Exchange Theatre, Sheffield Crucible, Birmingham Rep... all theatres where the council is a key partner! Come on, Bristol City, only with your championing the Old Vic will confidence return....