'Artistic merit' versus popularity
Sat, 16 Mar 2002, 12:39 pmNorma23 posts in thread
'Artistic merit' versus popularity
Sat, 16 Mar 2002, 12:39 pmA perennial subject, and one with which you are probably bored to death, but to illustrate the point (yet again)
The Old Mill Theatre is about to present one of the best dramatic plays, written by a well known playwright (Ronald Harwood) of modern time. It will be the first presentation of it in WA and for all I can discover, the first in Australia.
I refer of course to "Taking Sides" which commences on Friday March 22. Bookings are very slow to date and two social groups who usually book parties for our productions have told me: " not this one thanks, we'll wait for the next comedy"
We backed it because we think it's a damn good play which deserves to be seen, so all you 'theatre-lovers' out there who say where are all the good dramas, the booking number is 9367.8719
March 22/23, 27/28/30, April 4/5/6
The Old Mill Theatre is about to present one of the best dramatic plays, written by a well known playwright (Ronald Harwood) of modern time. It will be the first presentation of it in WA and for all I can discover, the first in Australia.
I refer of course to "Taking Sides" which commences on Friday March 22. Bookings are very slow to date and two social groups who usually book parties for our productions have told me: " not this one thanks, we'll wait for the next comedy"
We backed it because we think it's a damn good play which deserves to be seen, so all you 'theatre-lovers' out there who say where are all the good dramas, the booking number is 9367.8719
March 22/23, 27/28/30, April 4/5/6
Popular mechanics
Mon, 18 Mar 2002, 06:17 pmEliot McCann wrote:
-------------------------------
Norma Davis wrote:
-------------------------
>>>"Bookings are very slow to date and two social groups who usually book parties for our productions have told me: 'not this one thanks, we'll wait for the next comedy'."
>And that's entirely their prerogative. If the idea of sitting through a play (no matter how brilliant) watching Wilhelm Furtwangler be interrogated doesn't appeal, so be it.
Yes, but this prevalent attitude is unfortunately not going to help "Meddoes" vision of brave theatre, is it?
We've established that "artistic merit" and "popularity" are not mutually exclusive terms, but how do we account for "appeal" ? That is, before you've even seen a show, what is going to attract/repel you? Is it the cast? the company? the director? whether it's a comedy or a tragedy? a known script or a new work? a brilliant experimental piece or a banal but fun musical?
All of these factors seem to effect "appeal" long before we can determine whether or not the show is "popular".
Audiences in my experience tend to prefer "popular" theatre - ie, they wait until the reviews are out or they hear word of mouth from their friends (or this website) before making a decision. Hence the classic problem of empty houses the first week and turning people away on the last night. Obviously it helps a lot if the show also has "artistic merit" (however that is defined), but again, it doesn't seem to be a pre-requisite either. All sorts of things appeal to all types.
What we really need, somehow, is to develop brave audiences.
I'm sure there are people who will go along to see a movie with little or no expectation of what it may be like? Admittedly, anything produced at Hoyts is automatically pretty "safe", but there is still the opportunity to surprise yourself with something you don't automatically like, or hate. And whether that's a good or a bad experience usually doesn't deter you from going to see another movie you know little about.
If we were as brave in attending theatre that doesn't automatically appeal to us, we would create the environment for more variety. It would encourage companies to be willing to take more risks. It would give us the opportunity to be surprised. It probably wouldn't effect what is "popular", but it would perhaps expand the notion of what appeals. And it might help move us in the direction of this artistic utopia some seek.
It's not only the artists who ought to be brave.
Cheers,
Craig
<8>-/====/---------
-------------------------------
Norma Davis wrote:
-------------------------
>>>"Bookings are very slow to date and two social groups who usually book parties for our productions have told me: 'not this one thanks, we'll wait for the next comedy'."
>And that's entirely their prerogative. If the idea of sitting through a play (no matter how brilliant) watching Wilhelm Furtwangler be interrogated doesn't appeal, so be it.
Yes, but this prevalent attitude is unfortunately not going to help "Meddoes" vision of brave theatre, is it?
We've established that "artistic merit" and "popularity" are not mutually exclusive terms, but how do we account for "appeal" ? That is, before you've even seen a show, what is going to attract/repel you? Is it the cast? the company? the director? whether it's a comedy or a tragedy? a known script or a new work? a brilliant experimental piece or a banal but fun musical?
All of these factors seem to effect "appeal" long before we can determine whether or not the show is "popular".
Audiences in my experience tend to prefer "popular" theatre - ie, they wait until the reviews are out or they hear word of mouth from their friends (or this website) before making a decision. Hence the classic problem of empty houses the first week and turning people away on the last night. Obviously it helps a lot if the show also has "artistic merit" (however that is defined), but again, it doesn't seem to be a pre-requisite either. All sorts of things appeal to all types.
What we really need, somehow, is to develop brave audiences.
I'm sure there are people who will go along to see a movie with little or no expectation of what it may be like? Admittedly, anything produced at Hoyts is automatically pretty "safe", but there is still the opportunity to surprise yourself with something you don't automatically like, or hate. And whether that's a good or a bad experience usually doesn't deter you from going to see another movie you know little about.
If we were as brave in attending theatre that doesn't automatically appeal to us, we would create the environment for more variety. It would encourage companies to be willing to take more risks. It would give us the opportunity to be surprised. It probably wouldn't effect what is "popular", but it would perhaps expand the notion of what appeals. And it might help move us in the direction of this artistic utopia some seek.
It's not only the artists who ought to be brave.
Cheers,
Craig
<8>-/====/---------
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···
- ···