|
Post by Jan on Sept 14, 2017 11:44:15 GMT
Success seems to depend less on the AD as a person and who they have in their pockets. Lord knows even I could be a decent AD if I had regular access to the likes of Mike Bartlett, James Graham, and Robert Icke, or Alan Bennett, Richard Bean, and Marianne Elliott. Rufus is making a good go of a working relationship with Ivo van Hove, but it's by no means exclusive and it seems you need playwrights just as much as you need directors if not more so. The thing is the next Mike Bartlett or Alan Bennett might be in the NT studio working on their break-out hit right now. Any of the new writers whose work underwhelmed in the Dorfman might have learnt from that experience how to write their masterpiece. No-one is an instant genius. If you want truly new talent to come through it has to be nurtured, and given opportunities to develop and to fail. Surely that's part of the NT's remit? Being given an opportunity to fail on the Olivier stage could be a career ender. Interesting to see Goold say the Almeida has 4 or 5 musicals under development, I wonder how many plays in total these places have under development at any one time - obviously a key talent for the AD is to correctly choose the few that make it onto the stage.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Sept 14, 2017 11:46:33 GMT
The thing is the next Mike Bartlett or Alan Bennett might be in the NT studio working on their break-out hit right now. Any of the new writers whose work underwhelmed in the Dorfman might have learnt from that experience how to write their masterpiece. No-one is an instant genius. If you want truly new talent to come through it has to be nurtured, and given opportunities to develop and to fail. Surely that's part of the NT's remit? Being given an opportunity to fail on the Olivier stage could be a career ender. I imagine that's why the new writers are going in to the Dorfman, instead.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 11:49:35 GMT
Success seems to depend less on the AD as a person and who they have in their pockets. Lord knows even I could be a decent AD if I had regular access to the likes of Mike Bartlett, James Graham, and Robert Icke, or Alan Bennett, Richard Bean, and Marianne Elliott. Rufus is making a good go of a working relationship with Ivo van Hove, but it's by no means exclusive and it seems you need playwrights just as much as you need directors if not more so. The thing is the next Mike Bartlett or Alan Bennett might be in the NT studio working on their break-out hit right now. Any of the new writers whose work underwhelmed in the Dorfman might have learnt from that experience how to write their masterpiece. No-one is an instant genius. If you want truly new talent to come through it has to be nurtured, and given opportunities to develop and to fail. Surely that's part of the NT's remit? Exactly that. The studio is constantly reading new works- from their team of readers literally just reading, to those who are having readings/workshops. Some of those are progression to the Dorfman, some are being told 'come back in 6 months with a re-write and we'll talk again' and some are being told 'Not this time but send us your next play'. None of them knows which one might end up being the next big thing at this stage and and it might be the next AD or the next after that who actually gets the new James Graham or whoever. Likewise directors- every production in there has an AD or two working with the 'big name' we don't know yet who of them is going to be the next whoever either. It's all a bit of a waiting game and a fair bit of luck. On paper as well a lot of the 'big things' shouldn't have worked: Puppet horses in WW1 anyone? and things that look like a decent bet: Salome anyone? fall flat.
|
|
4,038 posts
|
Post by kathryn on Sept 14, 2017 12:34:25 GMT
The thing is the next Mike Bartlett or Alan Bennett might be in the NT studio working on their break-out hit right now. Any of the new writers whose work underwhelmed in the Dorfman might have learnt from that experience how to write their masterpiece. No-one is an instant genius. If you want truly new talent to come through it has to be nurtured, and given opportunities to develop and to fail. Surely that's part of the NT's remit? On paper as well a lot of the 'big things' shouldn't have worked: Puppet horses in WW1 anyone? I love Hytner's description in his book of the very first workshops they had for War Horse - basically a couple of actors with boxes on their heads being led around the room by another actor - and how he imagines some of the 'enemies of subsidised theatre' might have reacted to it.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 12:40:44 GMT
On paper as well a lot of the 'big things' shouldn't have worked: Puppet horses in WW1 anyone? I love Hytner's description in his book of the very first workshops they had for War Horse - basically a couple of actors with boxes on their heads being led around the room by another actor - and how he imagines some of the 'enemies of subsidised theatre' might have reacted to it. haha that is glorious! I actually love War Horse simply for it's audacity to be SO ridiculous an idea that should never have worked. 'Yeah so we're going to have like horses on stage, but they're like puppets...oh and there's a goose' I know I've told you this story before but War Horse was possibly one of the biggest arguments I had with my PhD supervisor (and that's saying something) because I put it in a list of 'innovative and risk taking works' by the NT. Having only read the book, and as ever not having the first clue about theatre she insisted that there was nothing 'innovative' about it. I forget the specifics but I think somewhere it ended with me saying 'BUT THE HORSES ARE PUPPETS' or similar. But in all seriousness nobody in the commercial sector, and I don't think anyone but the NT would have had the resources or frankly the artistic scope (and potential to hang themselves with) to pull that off.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 13:19:51 GMT
I forget the specifics but I think somewhere it ended with me saying 'BUT THE HORSES ARE PUPPETS' or similar. Are you quite sure that was you? Or was it Brian Conley?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 13:21:22 GMT
I forget the specifics but I think somewhere it ended with me saying 'BUT THE HORSES ARE PUPPETS' or similar. Are you quite sure that was you? Or was it Brian Conley? You can see me on Strictly in a couple of weeks. And the puppet. Though now I'm wishing the War Horse footnotes just read 'It's a puppet' and nothing more. Just to see if anyone noticed.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 14, 2017 13:59:53 GMT
I love Hytner's description in his book of the very first workshops they had for War Horse - basically a couple of actors with boxes on their heads being led around the room by another actor - and how he imagines some of the 'enemies of subsidised theatre' might have reacted to it. haha that is glorious! I actually love War Horse simply for it's audacity to be SO ridiculous an idea that should never have worked. 'Yeah so we're going to have like horses on stage, but they're like puppets...oh and there's a goose' I know I've told you this story before but War Horse was possibly one of the biggest arguments I had with my PhD supervisor (and that's saying something) because I put it in a list of 'innovative and risk taking works' by the NT. Having only read the book, and as ever not having the first clue about theatre she insisted that there was nothing 'innovative' about it. I forget the specifics but I think somewhere it ended with me saying 'BUT THE HORSES ARE PUPPETS' or similar. But in all seriousness nobody in the commercial sector, and I don't think anyone but the NT would have had the resources or frankly the artistic scope (and potential to hang themselves with) to pull that off. But it wasn't that innovative, I saw a full-sized horse represented by a puppet in a Shakespeare production 30 years prior to that, and it was such a famous production that I'm sure the NT creatives would have seen it. Anyone like to guess ? Just incidentally, one of the best NT productions ever, also 30 years before, was Strider the Story of a Horse with the horses quite brilliantly played by actors.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 15:12:29 GMT
haha that is glorious! I actually love War Horse simply for it's audacity to be SO ridiculous an idea that should never have worked. 'Yeah so we're going to have like horses on stage, but they're like puppets...oh and there's a goose' I know I've told you this story before but War Horse was possibly one of the biggest arguments I had with my PhD supervisor (and that's saying something) because I put it in a list of 'innovative and risk taking works' by the NT. Having only read the book, and as ever not having the first clue about theatre she insisted that there was nothing 'innovative' about it. I forget the specifics but I think somewhere it ended with me saying 'BUT THE HORSES ARE PUPPETS' or similar. But in all seriousness nobody in the commercial sector, and I don't think anyone but the NT would have had the resources or frankly the artistic scope (and potential to hang themselves with) to pull that off. But it wasn't that innovative, I saw a full-sized horse represented by a puppet in a Shakespeare production 30 years prior to that, and it was such a famous production that I'm sure the NT creatives would have seen it. Anyone like to guess ? Just incidentally, one of the best NT productions ever, also 30 years before, was Strider the Story of a Horse with the horses quite brilliantly played by actors. Are you actually my evil PhD supervisor in disguise? The amount of nit-picking you do I wouldn't be surprised. The key to what I said above was it was PART OF A LIST the rest of which I frankly can't be arsed to drag out now, but was part of a larger point about when/where the NT has taken risks. I concede I wasn't aware of that production, that you cite. But in the scheme of things I stand by my point that War Horse was a riskier endeavour than yet another Lear or Pinter.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 15:39:55 GMT
haha that is glorious! I actually love War Horse simply for it's audacity to be SO ridiculous an idea that should never have worked. 'Yeah so we're going to have like horses on stage, but they're like puppets...oh and there's a goose' I know I've told you this story before but War Horse was possibly one of the biggest arguments I had with my PhD supervisor (and that's saying something) because I put it in a list of 'innovative and risk taking works' by the NT. Having only read the book, and as ever not having the first clue about theatre she insisted that there was nothing 'innovative' about it. I forget the specifics but I think somewhere it ended with me saying 'BUT THE HORSES ARE PUPPETS' or similar. But in all seriousness nobody in the commercial sector, and I don't think anyone but the NT would have had the resources or frankly the artistic scope (and potential to hang themselves with) to pull that off. But it wasn't that innovative, I saw a full-sized horse represented by a puppet in a Shakespeare production 30 years prior to that, and it was such a famous production that I'm sure the NT creatives would have seen it. Anyone like to guess ? Just incidentally, one of the best NT productions ever, also 30 years before, was Strider the Story of a Horse with the horses quite brilliantly played by actors. Well, if you want to be really pedantic, of course there's nothing new under the sun and every sodding thing has been done before in one way or another. That doesn't mean War Horse wasn't a brave, innovative bit of work that could have been disastrous and that can reasonably be described as taking an original approach to translating the book into theatre.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 16:25:23 GMT
I'm greatly amused that this thread managed to create a mini twitter war between an academic who is so up her own arse it must be painful and 3 of us from this forum. Said academic declared War Horse was the 'worst thing' she'd ever seen in a theatre and the 3 of us proceeded to school her in just how fortunate she was if that was the case.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 16:31:41 GMT
I mean, Henry Ford didn't invent the wheel either, but he didn't half make it go round.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 14, 2017 16:38:40 GMT
But it wasn't that innovative, I saw a full-sized horse represented by a puppet in a Shakespeare production 30 years prior to that, and it was such a famous production that I'm sure the NT creatives would have seen it. Anyone like to guess ? Just incidentally, one of the best NT productions ever, also 30 years before, was Strider the Story of a Horse with the horses quite brilliantly played by actors. Are you actually my evil PhD supervisor in disguise? The amount of nit-picking you do I wouldn't be surprised. The key to what I said above was it was PART OF A LIST the rest of which I frankly can't be arsed to drag out now, but was part of a larger point about when/where the NT has taken risks. I concede I wasn't aware of that production, that you cite. But in the scheme of things I stand by my point that War Horse was a riskier endeavour than yet another Lear or Pinter. When I did my PhD the first part of it was to a literature review of what had been done previously. Anyway, all I'm saying is that the idea of representing a full-sized horse on stage via a puppet wasn't itself totally ridiculous and audacious to me because I'd seen it done before, in a production that was hugely influential in British theatre in terms of staging and design - you can still see its influence today. If you see that as nit-picking rather than pointing out something vaguely interesting then that is OK. Not sure when the NT has really taken a big risk - the Hall production of Oresteia using masks maybe. War Horse probably. Romans in Britain.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2017 16:41:35 GMT
Are you actually my evil PhD supervisor in disguise? The amount of nit-picking you do I wouldn't be surprised. The key to what I said above was it was PART OF A LIST the rest of which I frankly can't be arsed to drag out now, but was part of a larger point about when/where the NT has taken risks. I concede I wasn't aware of that production, that you cite. But in the scheme of things I stand by my point that War Horse was a riskier endeavour than yet another Lear or Pinter. When I did my PhD the first part of it was to a literature review of what had been done previously. Anyway, all I'm saying is that the idea of representing a full-sized horse on stage via a puppet wasn't itself totally ridiculous and audacious to me because I'd seen it done before, in a production that was hugely influential in British theatre in terms of staging and design - you can still see its influence today. If you see that as nit-picking rather than pointing out something vaguely interesting then that is OK. OOOOH I'm being told how to do a PhD as well now. Yes, I did an extensive literature review, but as my PhD wasn't on War Horse it didn't feature extensive reading on 'horses of the stage' instead War Horse was used as one of several examples in a relatively minor point. I shared that story as a mildly amusing anecdote given it was relevant to the conversation. I do think your points about the other horse-related puppets are in fact interesting. But unfortunately as with many of your posts it isn't what you said but the unfortunate manner in which you choose to approach sharing it.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 14, 2017 16:49:37 GMT
When I did my PhD the first part of it was to a literature review of what had been done previously. Anyway, all I'm saying is that the idea of representing a full-sized horse on stage via a puppet wasn't itself totally ridiculous and audacious to me because I'd seen it done before, in a production that was hugely influential in British theatre in terms of staging and design - you can still see its influence today. If you see that as nit-picking rather than pointing out something vaguely interesting then that is OK. OOOOH I'm being told how to do a PhD as well now. Yes, I did an extensive literature review, but as my PhD wasn't on War Horse it didn't feature extensive reading on 'horses of the stage' instead War Horse was used as one of several examples in a relatively minor point. I shared that story as a mildly amusing anecdote given it was relevant to the conversation. I do think your points about the other horse-related puppets are in fact interesting. But unfortunately as with many of your posts it isn't what you said but the unfortunate manner in which you choose to approach sharing it. At least I didn't put *rolls eyes* at the end, you've got to concede that.
|
|
1,119 posts
|
Post by martin1965 on Sept 14, 2017 17:22:12 GMT
OOOOH I'm being told how to do a PhD as well now. Yes, I did an extensive literature review, but as my PhD wasn't on War Horse it didn't feature extensive reading on 'horses of the stage' instead War Horse was used as one of several examples in a relatively minor point. I shared that story as a mildly amusing anecdote given it was relevant to the conversation. I do think your points about the other horse-related puppets are in fact interesting. But unfortunately as with many of your posts it isn't what you said but the unfortunate manner in which you choose to approach sharing it. At least I didn't put *rolls eyes* at the end, you've got to concede that. Been trying what that production was, can i have clue? Oh and how come you are a Doctor now?🙈
|
|
5,582 posts
|
Post by lynette on Sept 14, 2017 17:22:50 GMT
So Dr J, what is your special subject?
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Sept 14, 2017 17:37:15 GMT
At least I didn't put *rolls eyes* at the end, you've got to concede that. Been trying what that production was, can i have clue? Oh and how come you are a Doctor now?🙈 I've always been a Dr (Imperial College) but I didn't want to intimidate you Marty. The Ninagawa Macbeth. If you pop over to the Barbican for the revival I assume it's still in it, just briefly.
|
|
1,119 posts
|
Post by martin1965 on Sept 14, 2017 19:19:22 GMT
Been trying what that production was, can i have clue? Oh and how come you are a Doctor now?🙈 I've always been a Dr (Imperial College) but I didn't want to intimidate you Marty. The Ninagawa Macbeth. If you pop over to the Barbican for the revival I assume it's still in it, just briefly. Rolls eyes
|
|
745 posts
|
Post by horton on Sept 14, 2017 20:08:52 GMT
To Dr Jan Brock:
Yes I think there is a distinct difference between novelty and innovation.
I agree that there has been a failure to explore the full breadth of historical drama, but I have seen first-hand that the management is now much more open to outside approaches than in the Hytner/ Star era.
|
|
77 posts
|
Post by tributary on Sept 14, 2017 21:58:42 GMT
I'll just leave my regular post in threads about Rufus Norris being a disaster pointing out that Angels was a sell-out, and Follies, Mosquitoes and Oslo are largely sold out, and Network is largely sold out. Not sure that Hytner or other predecessors did better than that in any given period. In response to the predicted response saying he wasn't responsible for all these - you can't blame him for everything that doesn't work, and refuse to give him credit for anything that does work. That's not true. Oslo isn't selling well at all - I was there last night and it was visibly less than half full.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 14, 2017 22:02:26 GMT
Norris will serve out the length of his contract. No major company is going to risk dismissing an Artistic Director for anything other than gross misconduct.
|
|
2,520 posts
|
Post by n1david on Sept 14, 2017 22:18:31 GMT
Norris will serve out the length of his contract. No major company is going to risk dismissing an Artistic Director for anything other than gross misconduct. <cough> Emma Rice.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Sept 14, 2017 22:20:46 GMT
Precisely. The National isn't going to want that sort of publicity/backlash
|
|
Xanderl
Member
Not always very high value in terms of ticket yield or donations
|
Post by Xanderl on Sept 15, 2017 6:13:35 GMT
That's not true. Oslo isn't selling well at all - I was there last night and it was visibly less than half full. It is true - check the website. Every performance is either sold out or has one or two seats left. No idea why it would be half full last night - some weirdness about press nights? Also he will serve out the length of his contract has he has had a couple of flops, as has every other AD of the National, but is generally quite succesful. All these people going on about the "failing National Theatre" sound increasingly like Donald Trump going on about the "failing New York Times"
|
|
745 posts
|
Post by horton on Sept 15, 2017 17:28:33 GMT
Do we all have to put up our academic qualifications now?
Should we also include our current bank balance?
(PS I do mean this light-heartedly!)
|
|
6,276 posts
|
Post by Jon on Sept 15, 2017 17:35:07 GMT
It is true - check the website. Every performance is either sold out or has one or two seats left. No idea why it would be half full last night - some weirdness about press nights? It was practically sold out last Saturday so unless it's been comped heavily then I'm not buying it's not selling well at least for the National run
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2017 19:09:10 GMT
Do we all have to put up our academic qualifications now?Should we also include our current bank balance? (PS I do mean this light-heartedly!) I was wondering that. When did all this start?
|
|
745 posts
|
Post by horton on Sept 16, 2017 7:40:21 GMT
That's very impressive and persuasive- though measuring the distance in yards does date you rather.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2017 8:21:47 GMT
Not persuasive enough it turns out. I've been trying to get Rufus to follow up Pinocchio with The Little Mermaid for next year's Christmas show at the Nash, taking on Yours Truly as stage swimming consultant. I told him it'd guarantee him another year at least. He's having none of it. It was the same when I approached Titanic. A flat no.
Age and experience count for nothing nowadays...
|
|