classics vs new work

I, for one, regard the continued presence of classics on our performance roster to be an unqualified necessity for the continued evolution of theatre, for two reasons:

Firstly, the plays themselves are - by definition of being defined as a classic - superb examples of the craft of theatrical storytelling.

Secondly, for the above reason (among others) they continue to provide an incalculable inspiration to scores of contemporary story-tellers, and as such should always be accessible to the widest possible audience - in their ideal form (i.e.: on the stage)

Having said that, I am by no means taking sides on this issue. I also enjoy finding exciting new plays to stage, and am always blown away by the re-invention of ideas that contemporary playwrights display. I recently had the opportunity to stage a brand-spanking new play, with the playwright involved in the process all the way through casting, rehearsals, and up to opening night. It was a terrific experience. Good plays are good plays, and that experience proved it to me. Whether it was written yesterday or 500 years ago *should* be beside the point.

But lately I am finding an increasingly bolshy divide growing between the "classics" camp and the "new works" camp.

Is it just me, or is this divide an artifical construct? Is it even necessary? Is the tide of our theatrical community moving in the wrong direction simply for the sake of moving *somewhere*?

Is it fair that in the assessment process for funding bodies and hosting venues, that simply having a new work is a justification in and of itself for the submission to be fast-tracked, and yet classics need to demonstrate some "new way of working" in order to be considered?

Should companies with a stated aim of developing new work be required to stage the odd classic, simply for the sake of balance and inclusiveness, not to mention genuine cultural diversity?

Thoughts, anyone?




dm.

dm

hope all is well in your part of the world, old boy.

think what someone once said to me hits the nail on the head, that to be a well rounded actor, you need to experience all sorts in the canon, otherwise you cannot get a sense of perspective of where the writing has come from and where it might go too. there is a long long thread that travels from the greeks, to the romans, to the middle ages/commedia, to the renaissance, to restoration, to garrick, to melodrama to early 20th century to now.

there is a responsibility to the artists to allow them to exercise their various muscles in these theatrical stables and unless that is balanced you can never really grow. and if the responsibility is not trully undertaken, the theatre can become extremely overladen to one side.

also, audiences need that access to understand the stories and the traditions that run parallel to their own time in history and directly affect them. the same stories in well educated and produced surroundings should be able to move an audience at anytime. but if they are not familiar with say, restoration conventions, they will spend a lot of the time not comprehending the dramatic device on show. this leads to a dissatisying night in the theatre and therefore an misinformed decision that restoration, or whatever it may be, is not for them. i won't be coming back to that! and, unfortunately, the next chance to see the show performed may involve a hiatus of decades.

so, i would urge all actors and creatives out there, to delve into the reportoire in the coming months and see what they can find that helps tell their story well, for it is assured you shall find something. humans have been telling the same stories for thousands of years, mostly around sex and violence, and will undoubtedly continue throughout out our too oft short lives. keep the balance, not just for your own sake, but for the audiences.

regards, mick

mick wrote:

> hope all is well in your part of the world, old boy.

Well enough. I'm (just) managing to stay afloat financially, and I'm starting to get some auditions for paid gigs, which is not bad after, what is it - 9 months?

Part of coping with it all is that I've managed to suss out the mood'n'tood of this bossy-boots town, so I don't feel as overwhelmed as some people I know have felt.

Now if only a director with a wages budget would notice me.

**snip loads of really good stuff**

> so, i would urge all actors and creatives out there, to delve
> into the reportoire in the coming months and see what they
> can find that helps tell their story well, for it is assured
> you shall find something. humans have been telling the same
> stories for thousands of years, mostly around sex and
> violence, and will undoubtedly continue throughout out our
> too oft short lives. keep the balance, not just for your own
> sake, but for the audiences.

Well said. Too often we forget about the audience, preferring instead to appeal to potential employers instead. Trouble is, in doing that, we tend to forget that they, too, are audience. :o/

Bit of a thing, that.



peace,
dm.