|
Post by oxfordsimon on Nov 17, 2021 10:27:36 GMT
Look at the financial reporting for the RSC before believing their pleas of poverty. Charity Commission should have the most recent figures online.
They can find the repayments if they look hard enough. And do some work.
|
|
351 posts
|
Post by cirque on Nov 30, 2021 12:50:54 GMT
RSC
Royal Shakespeare Community
it is coming.......
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Nov 30, 2021 13:00:34 GMT
When thr RSC did their Open Stages projects they were doing really important work linking up with amateur theatremakers offering support, guidance and training.
I had a fantastic year with them as part of that.
But that stopped. It was low cost, high impact stuff.
Using amateur performers as a cheap way of bulking out professional costs is not the way forward. But Erica seems to ge obsessed...
|
|
585 posts
|
Post by christya on Nov 30, 2021 17:09:33 GMT
I just wish they'd come back to Newcastle occasionally, with something I want to see. I don't want every last thing on the programme to be an edgy twist on something, or gender-swapped, or whatever their latest trend is. Yes, by all means do those things, if there's an audience for it. But one or two traditional productions each year where I can just see Taming of the Shrew, or Much Ado, or hell at this point I'd even settle for Troilus and Cressida, as an old-style RSC production like I always enjoyed before, and they'd get my money again.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 1, 2021 7:25:13 GMT
I just wish they'd come back to Newcastle occasionally, with something I want to see. I don't want every last thing on the programme to be an edgy twist on something, or gender-swapped, or whatever their latest trend is. Yes, by all means do those things, if there's an audience for it. But one or two traditional productions each year where I can just see Taming of the Shrew, or Much Ado, or hell at this point I'd even settle for Troilus and Cressida, as an old-style RSC production like I always enjoyed before, and they'd get my money again. I wish they'd come back to London with some non-traditional edgy plays, or obscure Swan plays, but all we get is the odd bland mainstream popular Shakespeare - from this last cycle I don't think they've transferred a single one of the seldom performed plays (eg. Two Gentlemen, Timon, Troilus, Merchant, Shrew etc.). I fear neither of us are going to get what we want.
|
|
2,822 posts
|
Post by ceebee on Dec 1, 2021 22:32:17 GMT
Thus, it is becoming irrelevant. To us all. A travesty if ever there was one.
|
|
5,599 posts
|
Post by lynette on Dec 3, 2021 13:46:41 GMT
I just wish they'd come back to Newcastle occasionally, with something I want to see. I don't want every last thing on the programme to be an edgy twist on something, or gender-swapped, or whatever their latest trend is. Yes, by all means do those things, if there's an audience for it. But one or two traditional productions each year where I can just see Taming of the Shrew, or Much Ado, or hell at this point I'd even settle for Troilus and Cressida, as an old-style RSC production like I always enjoyed before, and they'd get my money again. I wish they'd come back to London with some non-traditional edgy plays, or obscure Swan plays, but all we get is the odd bland mainstream popular Shakespeare - from this last cycle I don't think they've transferred a single one of the seldom performed plays (eg. Two Gentlemen, Timon, Troilus, Merchant, Shrew etc.). I fear neither of us are going to get what we want. You’ll have to get on the ole bus, Jan and make it up to the Badlands, oops, Midlands.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 3, 2021 15:01:33 GMT
I wish they'd come back to London with some non-traditional edgy plays, or obscure Swan plays, but all we get is the odd bland mainstream popular Shakespeare - from this last cycle I don't think they've transferred a single one of the seldom performed plays (eg. Two Gentlemen, Timon, Troilus, Merchant, Shrew etc.). I fear neither of us are going to get what we want. You’ll have to get on the ole bus, Jan and make it up to the Badlands, oops, Midlands. Why ? The basis of their ACE grant is that they’re supposed to have a base in London too.
|
|
5,324 posts
|
Post by mrbarnaby on Dec 3, 2021 21:54:28 GMT
The truth is that the best directors, designers etc do not want to work there anymore. It has none of the appeal it once had and they cannot attract top drawer talent.
They would need a really progressive and exciting new Artistic Director if this is to survive. I hope they know that.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 4, 2021 10:06:32 GMT
The truth is that the best directors, designers etc do not want to work there anymore. It has none of the appeal it once had and they cannot attract top drawer talent. I think for the actors that's probably the case - I can imagine a star actor would rather work in Shakespeare at the Almeida rather than at Stratford with no London transfer but I wonder if it is the same for directors ? Most top international directors are freelances and would be unlikely to turn down paid work if it was convenient for them - my suspicion is that the RSC don't even invite them. Do you think they've even approached Robert Icke for example (just to name one of many) ? Having ditched the company structure where they used to have half a dozen top directors on the staff doing a couple of productions each every year they haven't transitioned to the NT structure of bringing in top freelance directors for high-profile one-off productions - they're in some sort of strange no-man's land with only one good director on the staff and none being engaged as freelances. Designers are a different story - designing for that thrust RST stage then potentially having to also adapt it for a proscenium arch stage is a tankless task.
|
|
152 posts
|
Post by alnoor on Jan 27, 2022 7:52:49 GMT
Just seen the cast list for the Henry VI plays Oh..,,,,.okay
|
|
624 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by cavocado on Jan 27, 2022 10:27:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jan 27, 2022 10:43:19 GMT
Looking at the pro casting for H6 and there are some good names and some questionable choices.
Paula D is always good value. I like Richard Cant. Very pleased to see Mark Q in the title role.
Not happy with Mariah G as Margaret. One of the best roles Shakespeare created needs an actor of real presence and authority. Ms Gale has neither of those. She is bland at best.
|
|
351 posts
|
Post by cirque on Jan 27, 2022 11:01:15 GMT
RSC have stated that they place major emphasis on training and involving amateurs in the work.This explains the Community insertion on the brand image.I don’t really go with this for a major international company where audiences want the very best,…however going to have to get used to the lower expectations RSC from now on.
|
|
1,015 posts
|
Post by David J on Jan 27, 2022 11:59:02 GMT
Mariah Gale certainly has a lot to live up to Katy Stephens from 16 years ago. God I feel old! I remember Mark Quarterly as Ariel in that cgi Tempest. Yeah, I think he'll be good as Henry VI. Meanwhile over at Much Ado About Nothing...please tell me these are costumes for the marketing and not what their vision of the future is!
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jan 27, 2022 12:09:36 GMT
Meanwhile over at Much Ado About Nothing...please tell me these are costumes for the marketing and not what their vision of the future is! They pre-warned us about this - it's this designer: www.simon-hartman.com/It seems the future is a world where we will all be able to pay £375 for a "Wire and cord chest plate". Can't wait.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jan 27, 2022 12:13:44 GMT
RSC have stated that they place major emphasis on training and involving amateurs in the work.This explains the Community insertion on the brand image.I don’t really go with this for a major international company where audiences want the very best,…however going to have to get used to the lower expectations RSC from now on. OK so my expectations of what they expect me to pay to see their amateur productions will be adjusted downwards accordingly. From their perspective I suppose it's sort of like the school photo thing - they at least guarantee selling a bunch of tickets to the relatives of the amateurs taking part. It's an odd idea though - do ROH have amateur singers in the chorus ? Surprised Equity aren't complaining.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jan 27, 2022 12:30:25 GMT
When the RSC did proper community engagement with their two Open Stages project, it really worked. I know, I was part of the second one and the benefits were huge.
The production of Pericles they put together was the right way to work with amateur casts.
The Dream they did with amateur mechanicals was less successful... and that was run by E. Whyman...
The H6 casting is a gimmick and not a good on.
Bring back Open Stages. That works.
|
|
351 posts
|
Post by cirque on Jan 27, 2022 12:30:49 GMT
Fully agree with you but I am at a loss now to think RSC will change.Track b@ck Erica s statements and you will see this theme. Theatre used to be a place with a real sense of danger…now it’s fully educational and accredited . Ah for a full on Titus……not here I think…..
|
|
1,015 posts
|
Post by David J on Jan 27, 2022 12:38:30 GMT
Meanwhile over at Much Ado About Nothing...please tell me these are costumes for the marketing and not what their vision of the future is! They pre-warned us about this - it's this designer: www.simon-hartman.com/It seems the future is a world where we will all be able to pay £375 for a "Wire and cord chest plate". Can't wait. I said this before on the Much ado thread. The RSC spent the last few years fundraising a costume workshop, putting time and effort to host exhibitions celebrating the best in costumes you created over the decades. And yet they have no confidence in your own designers to deliver costumes for this futuristic setting. And how much did they pay Simon Hartman to do this?
|
|
360 posts
|
Post by thebroadwayboy on Jan 27, 2022 12:59:41 GMT
I loved Matilda and think RSC is a vital part of the theatre community
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jan 27, 2022 13:11:42 GMT
The Dream they did with amateur mechanicals was less successful.... I saw that. One of the great comic roles in the canon played by an amateur. He was competent but no more, but I couldn’t work out what I as an audience member was supposed to get from the exercise.
|
|
624 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by cavocado on Jan 28, 2022 9:57:24 GMT
Thinking further about this community thing...
It seems inconsistent and perhaps hypocritical that the RSC is taking on large projects that are arguably alienating 'the community', like the cruise ship venture, and the Lydia and Manfred Gorvy Theatre. To me those kind of activities say "we're mainly here for the wealthy and powerful", because they are doing private shows for those who can afford them, and pandering to the vanity of wealthy benefactors: like it or not, theatre names tell us something about the values of the organisations behind them.
Presumably building that outdoor theatre also allowed wealthy private individuals to influence the policy of a publicly-funded organisation, because it would be astonishingly poor management if the decision to open that theatre didn't go hand in hand with the decision to leave the Swan and Other Place closed long term, and delay reopening the RST.
I don't think any of that says "we're all about the community". They didn't (as far as I am aware) hold public meetings to ask the community what they want from the RSC. Like it or not they are an economic organisation, and part of the justification for arts funding is always about its impact in terms of jobs, tourism and tax revenue. Keeping the theatres closed will be affecting the Stratford community in material ways like job losses and business closures, and the social impact of a declining economy.
All of that makes the Henry VI amateur involvement seem rather hollow and self-indulgent. A bit of a 'let them eat cake' gesture when real members of the community will be struggling to cope financially without a thriving, fully open RSC.
If they went either way - elitist or completely community focused - it might be understandable if it was consistently applied and part of a new long term and published strategy. Then ACE and the RSC's traditional audience, which I suppose is somewhere in the middle, could decide whether the new RSC is something they want to stick with or not. But recent activity suggests a series of ad hoc decisions with little consistent planning, which is disrespectful to audiences, cavalier about the RSC's legacy and role as a large cultural organisation, ignoring its economic influence in the region, and inappropriate to be spending public money without clarity of purpose.
There's also a lack of clarity about whether the RSC still sees itself as a training/nurturing organisation for theatre skills, which is one of the justifications for their large subsidy, because of the impact of their training on the wider theatre, tv and film industry.
So, given that they've moved a long way from the RSC's original aims, I think we (funders, ticket buyers, 'the people of England') deserve some kind of statement about what the company now stands for, what their values and long term goals are, and how they see those being funded.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jan 28, 2022 11:10:42 GMT
Stratford as a town is dying. I was there in August and it has lost so many shops and restaurants.
The RSC have done nothing to help by their decision to do next to nothing for two years.
There is much the could have done with their existing resources to keep theatre alive in Stratford. But they didn't.
They - like so many of our major public companies - have become bloated organisations more interested in looking inwards than serving audiences.
ACE are complicit in this and are in no position to put it right.
We need to start again with arts funding in the UK. Put audiences at the heart of it and make companies properly accountable.
|
|
382 posts
|
Post by stevemar on Jan 28, 2022 11:46:27 GMT
Perhaps this is a controversial comment, but to many tourists and London-centric theatre goers, the RSC has been irrelevant for a long time. They are not going to venture up to Stratford. Without Shakespeare though Stratford would be just an ordinary market town, so it is sad to see it is suffering.
The RSC needs a strong Stratford AND London base. Whilst the Barbican may not have been ideal, their lack of a base has meant there is no “loyal” audience. The Globe now occupies that space, even though I think there is room for two Shakespeare based theatres. But again, The Globe were smart in creating the smaller Sam Wanamaker Theatre.
The RSC could do a deal with the Bridge (thrust stage) or another theatre for a longer season. I know we have been here before - Barbican abandoned and then partially re occupied, or their attempt at limited West End seasons.
Many members of the public think of Shakespeare just as something from school, and will only be drawn in by star names. Certainly this has worked in the past - such as RSC Hamlet and David Tennant. At least a London base will help them to re-establish themselves, and be bold.
I suppose the community element is a way to connect with the Stratford area, and bring in more diverse audiences, so this is a decent start. But they need to be bolder.
|
|
170 posts
|
Post by paplazaroo on Jan 28, 2022 11:49:29 GMT
This is such a good thread and really gets to the nub of what is wrong with arts funding in this country. It's a wide problem beginning with austerity and the notion that theatres and theatre makers should provide a community service to plug the gaps cut away over the last ten years. There's nothing wrong with outreach but when the art stops being made from an artistic impulse and is created purely to keep a funder and their tick boxes happy it ceases to be interesting. Regional theatres are just as bad as RSC, ideology over interesting work. Throw in twitter to the mix and it's more profitable to do a bland show that garners little interest but allows you to shout about all the apparent good you're doing on twitter. The result is declining audiences. I frequently ask myself if Pinter or Beckett would be able to get a show on stage these days and I think the answer is that it wouldn't be easy for them. Sorry that's a bit of a rant but just my twopence worth.
|
|
624 posts
Member is Online
|
Post by cavocado on Jan 28, 2022 13:06:24 GMT
Interesting point about twitter paplazaroo. I see a lot of this, and you can't blame theatres for using whatever resources are available to them. But it often feels like they think social media is part of their core job, and that they're creating important conversations, raising awareness of issues, etc, when actually they're just chatting to a selective bunch of people who already share their values. It ticks boxes, but it's nothing to do with being creative, challenging or whatever. It's arrogant and patronising to think they can make social change outside of their basic function of connecting with audiences through performance. Here's an example which I couldn't understand why it irritated me at the time, because I agree with the overall message. But there is nothing specific here about who was saying that Shakespeare's plays only belong to white people and where this uproar happened. It got lots of back pats on the RSC's social media, but what does that achieve? www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/theatre-dance/news/shakespeare-racism-rsc-black-cast-b1996955.html. If people objected to the casting, what will challenge that is a very high quality production, not a twitterstorm. I agree a funding re-think is probably needed, as oxfordsimon says, though the current government isn't one I'd trust to deliver this, or to understand what the problems are and what is important to preserve/support, so I'm not sure what the solution is. I do think outreach work is important, but not at the expense of quality, and it needs to be meaningful and not disengage existing audiences. Re Jan's point about Erica's Dream, I found this quote from her, which kind of sums up the problem for me. It's great that taking part changed someone's life, but...how did that benefit audiences? "There is a woman called Becky Morris who played Bottom for me in A Midsummer Night's Dream in Nottingham. She had enjoyed drama at school, but hadn’t done very much and let it go. She was working in a sandwich bar and someone invited her along to an amateur group and she went along in trepidation. She found that she really loved it. Two things happened as a result; she started working as a teaching assistant in a school (and she’s still doing this, specialising in drama) and she became only the second woman in the history of the RSC to play Bottom. She’s like a female Les Dawson – completely amazing. So her confidence levels and her sense of what she’s capable of went through the roof. How she thinks about the rest of her life and what she will hand onto her son – a sense of creativity and courage." That's Erica's example of how Shakespeare changed someone's life and it's about participation, so what does that say about the RSC as a company putting on productions for people to watch, people whose lives might potentially be changed by that experience? Like many people, being an audience member has affected the way I think, feel and see the world in all kinds of big and small ways. Isn't that more core to the function of theatre than to be life changing for the actors? And if quality or coherence is compromised, that is also reducing the chance of making those connections with audiences which potentially have that life changing impact. It worries me that the while RSC is merrily going about it's do-gooding thing (Look! We've turned a humble sandwich maker into a creative teaching assistant!) they are not giving enough thought to all of the connections they might be damaging, and the lives they are no longer changing, because they're turning off the people that previously bought their tickets.
|
|
|
Post by oxfordsimon on Jan 28, 2022 13:06:52 GMT
I suppose the community element is a way to connect with the Stratford area, and bring in more diverse audiences, so this is a decent start. But they need to be bolder. The community element is doing nothing for Stratford None of the amateur cast are from the town. At this point, getting any audience in to see a RSC production is more important than a tick box diversity exercise. And diversity means a lot more than just looking at skin colour. And means a lot more than just looking at one particular skin colour. The RSC will be congratulating themselves at the diversity of the H6 cast. But it isn't really diverse. There do not appear to be many if any cast members of Asian heritage. Given the size of the cast for these productions, I contend that the full spectrum of racial diversity in the UK should be reflected in the casting.
|
|
351 posts
|
Post by cirque on Jan 28, 2022 14:58:48 GMT
the strength of feeling is clear.It is certainly time for RSC enquiry into mission and execution. many lives have been changed by watching earlier RSC.......that was their unique purpose. Many other arts organisations put teaching at the core....teachers no longer hold the responsibility to do it properly and need support. H6 looks like a big community coach trip gasp.....many light years from the Boyd ensemble. RSC and NT poor shadows of former danger days.
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Jan 28, 2022 15:16:59 GMT
I suppose the community element is a way to connect with the Stratford area, and bring in more diverse audiences, so this is a decent start. But they need to be bolder. Given the size of the cast for these productions, I contend that the full spectrum of racial diversity in the UK should be reflected in the casting. There doesn't seem to be a single non-white face amongst the dozen amateurs they're recruited in Cornwall. I would imagine use of amateurs is actually counter-productive if you're concerned about diversity of casting because the volunteers are likely to come from the educated middle-classes already familiar with Shakespeare and who have time and money to be in Stratford for the full run of the plays during April and May and so automatically skewed away from the working class and ethnic minorities. So, it's an elitist exercise in itself.
|
|