|
|
Post by partytentdown on Dec 7, 2016 12:00:27 GMT
It's all gone quiet down at everyone's favourite crisis-hit backwards-thinking theatre! Anyone heard much - have they got a new AD yet? Have they announced their Rice exit strategy? (Rexit). Does anyone care?
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 12:05:47 GMT
We had next summer's season announcement already, and Emma Rice isn't leaving until the end of the 2017/2018 winter season, so I don't know what sort of news we could reasonably expect at this time, as it's a bit early for casting, and a lot early to know who's going to be taking up a position that won't kick off until January 2018 and hasn't even been advertised yet (though does a position strictly need to be advertised when its forthcoming availability kicked up such a storm?).
Well, I suppose it's not too early to find out who's going to be in The White Devil and Othello, news about those would be appreciated...
|
|
433 posts
|
Post by DuchessConstance on Dec 7, 2016 13:20:27 GMT
Current rumour is they aren't going to have a new AD, but have the theatre managed by the board with guest directors for a year or so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 14:13:18 GMT
Current rumour is they aren't going to have a new AD, but have the theatre managed by the board with guest directors for a year or so. With Emma Rice as one of those guest directors, perhaps? I suppose that the Board has realised that no one of any worth would apply to be AD as they would then be ostracised by the rest of the theatre world. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 14:19:12 GMT
On the one hand, having a break before appointing a new AD might be a good idea, take the weight of pressure off Rice's successor. On the other hand, I don't entirely know that "THE BOARD IS IN CONTROL, YOU DIRECT AT THEIR PLEASURE" sounds particularly inspiring. Absolute worst case scenario, the theatre has spent twenty years trying to overcome the idea that it's more of a tourist attraction than a theatre, only to end up going full theme park after all because that's what the money people want now. Man it would suck if the place ended up artistically stagnating after all this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 14:25:07 GMT
'Rexit' - I love it! Describes quite nicely what they did to their PR with that statement...
|
|
904 posts
|
Post by lonlad on Dec 7, 2016 15:30:09 GMT
Word on the street is that it will be Lucy Bailey, most likely. She was on the shortlist last time and has straddled all the various regimes - and she's radical without being rabidly so.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 15:48:14 GMT
Word on the street is that it will be Lucy Bailey, most likely. She was on the shortlist last time and has straddled all the various regimes - and she's radical without being rabidly so. Goodness! That's one way of getting the job I suppose. We've all been there though haven't we? Ummm, haven't we? Ahem. |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 7, 2016 17:21:57 GMT
Current rumour is they aren't going to have a new AD, but have the theatre managed by the board with guest directors for a year or so. With Emma Rice as one of those guest directors, perhaps? I suppose that the Board has realised that no one of any worth would apply to be AD as they would then be ostracised by the rest of the theatre world. Ha ha. They will get dozens of application, no problem, just wait and see. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 17:48:10 GMT
Ha ha. They will get dozens of application, no problem, just wait and see. No one can apply if, as rumoured, the looming AD vacancy is to be frozen, with a series of fixed-term guest artistic season directorships in substitution, can they? |
|
1,119 posts
|
Post by martin1965 on Dec 7, 2016 18:14:09 GMT
That scenario cant be true can it? Im no great fan of the place but guest season directors!! Sounds a disaster. Some White Devil and Othello casting would be welcome, they must be close to rehearsals for WD.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 7, 2016 18:41:49 GMT
Ha ha. They will get dozens of application, no problem, just wait and see. No one can apply if, as rumoured, the looming AD vacancy is to be frozen, with a series of fixed-term guest artistic season directorships in substitution, can they? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 19:40:16 GMT
I read the rumour as meaning directors would come in on a show-by-show basis, not to have a go at ADing for a while. Guest ADs, rather than guest directors, also sounds pretty odd.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 7, 2016 21:41:03 GMT
You could be right, Baemax. I read the Duchess's rumour as being like Theatre Royal Haymarket where Jonathan Kent, Sean Mathias, Trevor Nunn and Sean Mathias again programmed three-play seasons. Or like Angus Jackson's forthcoming Royal Shakespeare Theatre Rome season.
An artistic director does much more than direct plays and programme plays, and the Globe Board didn't want to give the Artistic Director their usual artistic freedoms. So it is quite credible that the Board has decided to sit like hawks in fierce control of every artistic aspect of the Globe's operations, and then to appoint directors to programme limited seasons of work in accordance with their imposed bonkers parameters.
|
|
7,183 posts
|
Post by Jon on Dec 8, 2016 0:34:38 GMT
The Theatre Royal Haymarket Seasons weren't successful apart from Waiting for Godot, Flare Path and The Tempest, it's the reason they went back to being a receiving house again
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2016 6:53:37 GMT
I'd assumed the Duchess meant individual guest directors but I can see the model HG suggests happening.
Pure speculation but I wonder if they are taking time to rethink the whole management / governance structure of the place. e.g. have a theatre AD purely responsible for the productions, someone else responsible for education / outreach, both reporting into an overall director of the Globe?
|
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 8, 2016 7:44:30 GMT
You could be right, Baemax. I read the Duchess's rumour as being like Theatre Royal Haymarket where Jonathan Kent, Sean Mathias, Trevor Nunn and Sean Mathias again programmed three-play seasons. Or like Angus Jackson's forthcoming Royal Shakespeare Theatre Rome season. An artistic director does much more than direct plays and programme plays, and the Globe Board didn't want to give the Artistic Director their usual artistic freedoms. So it is quite credible that the Board has decided to sit like hawks in fierce control of every artistic aspect of the Globe's operations, and then to appoint directors to programme limited seasons of work in accordance with their imposed bonkers parameters. But you still think no director will actually work there to show solidarity with Rice ? You underestimate the competition and back-stabbing there is amongst theatre directors. If Rice had actually walked out then you might have been right but as she agreed to stay on for a while in some sort of compromise that gives others free rein to step in. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2016 9:20:42 GMT
Emma Rice had already planned and prepared the 2017/18 season before her departure was agreed. As an example of this process, it has been revealed in interview that Matthew Dunster's Imogen project was commenced with exploratory workshops a year in advance of the final production. I don't think she has compromised the 2017/18 season. It appears to be just as originally planned, and the Board calls it the conclusion of her experiment in the Globe which they will not permit in future!
The issue for future ADs of Shakespeare's Globe is that the Board has demonstrated that they aren't actually free to act as artistic directors in the same way as they would be everywhere else. Instead, they are constrained by the unholy alliance of a coven of obscure academics and archaic heritagistas. It would be embarrassing for anyone to apply to be AD of SG in these emasculating circumstances.
However, programming a season of work would be an enticing prospect because it is more fulfilling than directing a single standalone show, and it's without the wider responsibilities of full artistic directorship of an organisation.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 8, 2016 9:26:53 GMT
It's perfectly possible for a director to be an ambitious back-stabber and still not want to take the AD mantle immediately from Emma Rice, not out of solidarity but out of a very real fear it will end up backfiring for them in the same way it has backfired for Rice. Plus if it was my ultimate goal to be spoken of in the future with reverence as a brilliant and innovative director, I wouldn't want to go anywhere near the Globe right now, as it has been made extremely clear that innovation is not welcomed and will be suppressed.
|
|
|
|
Post by partytentdown on Dec 8, 2016 22:32:31 GMT
I imagine their christmas party will be a barrel of laughs this year.
|
|
4,984 posts
|
Post by Someone in a tree on Dec 9, 2016 7:07:38 GMT
I imagine their christmas party will be a barrel of laughs this year. I wonder what the pie fillings will be ... |
|
|
|
Post by Jan on Dec 9, 2016 7:38:26 GMT
Emma Rice had already planned and prepared the 2017/18 season before her departure was agreed. As an example of this process, it has been revealed in interview that Matthew Dunster's Imogen project was commenced with exploratory workshops a year in advance of the final production. I don't think she has compromised the 2017/18 season. It appears to be just as originally planned, and the Board calls it the conclusion of her experiment in the Globe which they will not permit in future! The issue for future ADs of Shakespeare's Globe is that the Board has demonstrated that they aren't actually free to act as artistic directors in the same way as they would be everywhere else. Instead, they are constrained by the unholy alliance of a coven of obscure academics and archaic heritagistas. It would be embarrassing for anyone to apply to be AD of SG in these emasculating circumstances. However, programming a season of work would be an enticing prospect because it is more fulfilling than directing a single standalone show, and it's without the wider responsibilities of full artistic directorship of an organisation. That argument might apply to a normal theatre (like the Haymarket say) but the Globe is already wildly constrained by the fact their main house productions have to be overwhelmingly by Shakespeare so a big part of a normal AD's job "everywhere else" is removed anyway and always has been. Anyway, very few will be embarrassed about applying for any form of AD job there. Reading biographies and diaries and so on it is an eye-opener to find directors in the past who have been happy when other directors got bad reviews, it is no doubt no different today, it is a competitive market. "It is not sufficient that I succeed, it is also necessary that my friends fail" (Gore Vidal, I think) |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 9, 2016 8:29:02 GMT
But Emma Rice isn't failing. She is doing marvelously with the critics and the public. But the Board is imposing unacceptable rules of production to operate from April 2018 onwards.
Obviously, the focus on Shakespeare isn't an artistic constraint of the same nature. The 2012 visiting international Shakespeares demonstrated that there is an infinity of ways to produce Shakespeare in the Globe. And there's also an infinity of ways to contextualise the Shakespeare with the choice of the other productions.
|
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 13, 2016 15:20:33 GMT
|
|
2,496 posts
|
Post by zahidf on Dec 13, 2016 15:25:13 GMT
Comedy store players 24th April
|
|
