Powering the Performing Arts
Wed, 16 Aug 2000, 12:08 amGrant Malcolm16 posts in thread
Powering the Performing Arts
Wed, 16 Aug 2000, 12:08 amIt's been exciting to follow the suggestions for re-developing the old East Perth Power Station and turning it into a cultural centre with performing arts facilities.
While I'm not too sure about the obsession with blindly following the lead of other capital cities in pushing for a performing arts venue situated on the water's edge - can't we come up with something original? - the Power Station represents a stunning opportunity.
The building itself is beautifully situated and the huge structure is most impressive when view from either the railway or the new tunnel bridge. The proximity to both the casino and Northbridge lend the venue a centrality that would be invaluable in attracting new audiences.
I'm not sure that i share Geoff Gibbs' enthusiasm - reported in The West - for housing two theatre venues seating 400 and 600 respectively. Only a couple of weeks ago in the same paper, Ron Banks was bemoaning the fact that our larger venues will be returning to extended periods of darkness after an unprecedented run. And Gibbs' is suggesting we need two more medium sized venues?!?!
The two busiest theatres in town - the BlueRoom and Effie Crump - each seat less than 100. Do we really need another two venues seating four times that number that will be empty nine months of the year except for when we have imported products showing?
If Geoff Gibbs and Arts Minister, Mike Board, are serious about supporting local industry, I hope the venue will house at least one much smaller studio space. The space can easily be filled by local productions on less than stellar budgets.
What does everyone else think?
Cheers
Grant
While I'm not too sure about the obsession with blindly following the lead of other capital cities in pushing for a performing arts venue situated on the water's edge - can't we come up with something original? - the Power Station represents a stunning opportunity.
The building itself is beautifully situated and the huge structure is most impressive when view from either the railway or the new tunnel bridge. The proximity to both the casino and Northbridge lend the venue a centrality that would be invaluable in attracting new audiences.
I'm not sure that i share Geoff Gibbs' enthusiasm - reported in The West - for housing two theatre venues seating 400 and 600 respectively. Only a couple of weeks ago in the same paper, Ron Banks was bemoaning the fact that our larger venues will be returning to extended periods of darkness after an unprecedented run. And Gibbs' is suggesting we need two more medium sized venues?!?!
The two busiest theatres in town - the BlueRoom and Effie Crump - each seat less than 100. Do we really need another two venues seating four times that number that will be empty nine months of the year except for when we have imported products showing?
If Geoff Gibbs and Arts Minister, Mike Board, are serious about supporting local industry, I hope the venue will house at least one much smaller studio space. The space can easily be filled by local productions on less than stellar budgets.
What does everyone else think?
Cheers
Grant
RE: Powering the Performing Arts
Thu, 17 Aug 2000, 08:05 pmThe HMT is a magical place - however the problem is not the venue itÂ’s the super structure that run it, this has nothing to do with the present managers, but has a lot to do with those originally charged to control this and other venues.
This octopus is still lounging around with itÂ’s tentacles everywhere - in the name of theatre for the mass, ending up as an inverted pyramid precariously balanced on a inadequate base that is attempting to support this over large structure.
So now in order to have a new lease on their jobs and without loosing their hold - "lets out-source the management" - which has been done.
This must prove the point that they should not have been doing it in the first place - unfortunately it is now still the same horse with a different jockey. I hope that the new Mangers can turn it around and I am sure they are very competent - but if they are successful they run the risk of being out-bid next time and/or if they fail and hit the wall the octopus gets the ‘T’ shirt again anyway.
The Government or local council only play lip service to community theatre, sure they do supply venues in many areas - but most arenÂ’t theatres, only a tizzed-up community hall with auditorium seating, not what is needed and required - so we put up with it or hire a better space. Even some of these better places are nothing more than just changing the name to performing arts centres - as the only expertise required to design one of these PACÂ’s is they must have at least seen 'A' live show once - but thatÂ’s another story!!!
It all boils down to - in their view - that each venue must be able to be self supporting - why?
I believe it was "King OÂ’Malley" said it while on the subject of public transport - Instead of loosing vast amounts of money per year forcing the public to pay for a ticket to travel, all we should do is supply the bus and the driver and we would save a fortune, as we would not need conductors to take the money, inspectors to inspect the conductors and supervisors to supervise the inspectors and so on - (or words to that effect).
They supply the venue - we supply what goes on inside and "Do ITÂ’ - is not this "what we are about"
yes/no?.
Joe McCabe
This octopus is still lounging around with itÂ’s tentacles everywhere - in the name of theatre for the mass, ending up as an inverted pyramid precariously balanced on a inadequate base that is attempting to support this over large structure.
So now in order to have a new lease on their jobs and without loosing their hold - "lets out-source the management" - which has been done.
This must prove the point that they should not have been doing it in the first place - unfortunately it is now still the same horse with a different jockey. I hope that the new Mangers can turn it around and I am sure they are very competent - but if they are successful they run the risk of being out-bid next time and/or if they fail and hit the wall the octopus gets the ‘T’ shirt again anyway.
The Government or local council only play lip service to community theatre, sure they do supply venues in many areas - but most arenÂ’t theatres, only a tizzed-up community hall with auditorium seating, not what is needed and required - so we put up with it or hire a better space. Even some of these better places are nothing more than just changing the name to performing arts centres - as the only expertise required to design one of these PACÂ’s is they must have at least seen 'A' live show once - but thatÂ’s another story!!!
It all boils down to - in their view - that each venue must be able to be self supporting - why?
I believe it was "King OÂ’Malley" said it while on the subject of public transport - Instead of loosing vast amounts of money per year forcing the public to pay for a ticket to travel, all we should do is supply the bus and the driver and we would save a fortune, as we would not need conductors to take the money, inspectors to inspect the conductors and supervisors to supervise the inspectors and so on - (or words to that effect).
They supply the venue - we supply what goes on inside and "Do ITÂ’ - is not this "what we are about"
yes/no?.
Joe McCabe
- ···
- ···