Convener: Martin McLean
Participants: Rebecca Hall, Amy Ip + 3 more.
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
• Rebecca talked about Colchester’s youth project. Has several age groups. Setting up youth group can be challenging – set up a new group in Clacton but it failed through lack of numbers.
• One man talked about working with young people in Newham. Have a lot of interest there. Talked about one occasion when the drama leader actually went out on the streets to find young people and bring them along to the group.
• Martin talked about the challenges of running a youth project for Deafinitely Theatre. Tough because of targets set by the funders although there are enough young deaf people in London interested in drama to set up a group.
• Amy talked about working with a youth theatre group in Islington. Can be a challenge to keep young people coming to the group but she found that using discipline helps! She marketed at very specific groups such as the Chinese community through their newsletters.
• A woman who worked for a company based in Liverpool talked about her experiences of setting up youth groups for Deaf and disabled young people. She is currently producing a guidebook for drama workshop leaders working with disabled groups.
Showing posts with label Deaf. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Deaf. Show all posts
Thursday, 4 February 2010
071 Access – How Do We Get Better?
Convener: Nick Sweeting
Participants: Various – please add name if you were there
Deepa Shastri, Nadine Ishani, Helen Pringle, Becci Haines
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
- Attitude is all important
- Be inclusive – include “targeted’ groups in planning
- Look at what’s been done before inc research
- ACE funded buildings have obligations
- Opportunity of 2012 Paralympics – inc people with other languages – or general Olympics too but with Access
- Keep customers in mind
- Who do we influence?
- Theatres only open access at specific times and with specific companies
- A long ‘nagging’ journey
- Colour schemes…..affect everyone
- Internet – feedback forums
- Accessible print – RNIB Website – guideline – good example = New Wolsey
- Print matching audience
- Inc Marketing department in access discussions
- Mktg to Deaf audiences – awareness of signing and captions
- Access for immersive performances/1 to 1 performances – include Deaf and disabled people in the rehearsal/development process
- Signing/description for impro shows
ACTION
Not all the onus should be on Companies like Graeae and deafinitely Theatre –
non Deaf and disabled led companies need to get involved.
Nick and Improbable to enquire how to take things forward…..meet 2012 team – Steve Mannix?
Participants: Various – please add name if you were there
Deepa Shastri, Nadine Ishani, Helen Pringle, Becci Haines
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
- Attitude is all important
- Be inclusive – include “targeted’ groups in planning
- Look at what’s been done before inc research
- ACE funded buildings have obligations
- Opportunity of 2012 Paralympics – inc people with other languages – or general Olympics too but with Access
- Keep customers in mind
- Who do we influence?
- Theatres only open access at specific times and with specific companies
- A long ‘nagging’ journey
- Colour schemes…..affect everyone
- Internet – feedback forums
- Accessible print – RNIB Website – guideline – good example = New Wolsey
- Print matching audience
- Inc Marketing department in access discussions
- Mktg to Deaf audiences – awareness of signing and captions
- Access for immersive performances/1 to 1 performances – include Deaf and disabled people in the rehearsal/development process
- Signing/description for impro shows
ACTION
Not all the onus should be on Companies like Graeae and deafinitely Theatre –
non Deaf and disabled led companies need to get involved.
Nick and Improbable to enquire how to take things forward…..meet 2012 team – Steve Mannix?
036 How does Deaf and Disabled theatre attract a mainstream audience?
Convener: Martin McLean
Participants: Susanna, Shawn, Kerry, Tim, Amanda, Jean, Emily, Kempson, Sharan Kean, Garry Housman (Theatre Venture), Lisa Hammond, Ali Tomkinson
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
• [We need to] speak in the language of the media.
• Consider how to interest the press?
• What language should we use to talk to the media?
• As a disabled person, I get angry how I’m described – the physical is described first. If, at the end of a critique, serious consideration/criticism is made – then I am very pleased.
• Language has changed from phrases formerly used: deaf and dumb, deaf mute, a world of silence. Now, a capital D is used for the word Deaf.
• [When talking to the press] it’s silly not to say wheelchair user but how to do it so that it’s not twisted?
• Infiltrate from the inside…
• However much you try to write the killer press release, you’re stuck with whether or not the press will turn up. As soon as you say ‘disabled’ the press are off.
• What if we don’t tell them [the press/audience] in advance?
• Producers are starting to think of creative ways to attract particular audiences.
• Why is disabled art hampered? Don’t perpetuate difficulties by producing bad work.
• We’re all about accessibility but not all work can be accessible.
• If it’s good work – then it is. Why keep saying it is?
• Some work needs experimentation – it needs time. Do we need to decide when experimentation ends?
• With Counting the Ways, a research and development project, attempting to achieve inclusion almost damaged its ability to communicate.
• [With one production] with a cast of 2 (?), in terms of modes of communication, there was signing, audio description and speech – the resulting work was only partially successful.
• Sometimes watching signing can be a fixation [for hearing audiences?]
• Nonetheless, if the work is good enough audiences’ attention will stay with the work itself. [It was noted when considering a French language film] With Un Prophet, English speaking audiences will still go to see it because of its quality, despite the use of captions.
• How do we meet the brief of making amazing theatre?
• Investment in a piece so that it has the time to develop into being as good a piece as it can be.
• Using audio description, signing and so on are artistic considerations that need to be addressed creatively (money is not always the issue).
• Is the attempt to communicate – to speak – getting in the way of making theatre?
• Working with Graeae [it was noted from experience] could be frustrating when working with a number of specialist support assistants in the same small space as [one’s] fellow actors.
• One research panel asked [of a theatre maker when assessing their experience of making work]: did you have a remit to prove yourself or be more accessible?
• Q:
With regard to casting, is the same rigour applied in disabled contexts as it is in the mainstream?
• A:
It’s such a new area – people are so afraid of saying the wrong thing.
• There was a situation in one play when a deaf actor was cast who wasn’t up to the job (which she subsequently acknowledged and the role was recast with a more skilled hearing actor).
• There is a dilemma though: if deaf actors aren’t cast then how well they develop and improve, but where are the jobs?
• We [performer’s experience] can be stuck just with disability theatre – you end up caught within the same small circuit.
• With street-theatre, you can attract audiences with work on its own merit – the response is immediate.
• Whatever you say about Cast-offs, it did attract a mainstream audience.
• However, it was in the wrong way. The remit was to produce a spoof documentary but due to the poor quality of the writing etc, the result was just a piece [lacking in irony] that resembled a Channel 5 thing.
• Queer as Folk showed mainstream audiences aspects of gay life that challenged [perceptions]. Cast-offs didn’t meet expectation. It shot itself in the foot. From the start it marginalised its subject.
• Question:
How do we help to develop the quality of our product?
• Responses:
(A programming specialist’s view] Book only quality – people of quality.
• Commission work
• [Martin asked] Why do hearing audiences attend work with Deaf / disabled / and or a particular focus? [Conversely] Why do they not attend? [He is] looking for ideas.
• If you need a mainstream audience, can you cater for a deaf audience too?
• Signed songs / signing as gestural language in dance theatre can be an appealing feature of the work for mainstream audiences [as well as disabled audiences], though not necessarily – depending upon taste.
• In Israel, Nalagat produced a piece – Not by bread alone with twelve (?) disabled actors. The work, always intended for a mainstream audience, has played to good houses for two years (the work will be coming to Britain this year).
Participants: Susanna, Shawn, Kerry, Tim, Amanda, Jean, Emily, Kempson, Sharan Kean, Garry Housman (Theatre Venture), Lisa Hammond, Ali Tomkinson
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
• [We need to] speak in the language of the media.
• Consider how to interest the press?
• What language should we use to talk to the media?
• As a disabled person, I get angry how I’m described – the physical is described first. If, at the end of a critique, serious consideration/criticism is made – then I am very pleased.
• Language has changed from phrases formerly used: deaf and dumb, deaf mute, a world of silence. Now, a capital D is used for the word Deaf.
• [When talking to the press] it’s silly not to say wheelchair user but how to do it so that it’s not twisted?
• Infiltrate from the inside…
• However much you try to write the killer press release, you’re stuck with whether or not the press will turn up. As soon as you say ‘disabled’ the press are off.
• What if we don’t tell them [the press/audience] in advance?
• Producers are starting to think of creative ways to attract particular audiences.
• Why is disabled art hampered? Don’t perpetuate difficulties by producing bad work.
• We’re all about accessibility but not all work can be accessible.
• If it’s good work – then it is. Why keep saying it is?
• Some work needs experimentation – it needs time. Do we need to decide when experimentation ends?
• With Counting the Ways, a research and development project, attempting to achieve inclusion almost damaged its ability to communicate.
• [With one production] with a cast of 2 (?), in terms of modes of communication, there was signing, audio description and speech – the resulting work was only partially successful.
• Sometimes watching signing can be a fixation [for hearing audiences?]
• Nonetheless, if the work is good enough audiences’ attention will stay with the work itself. [It was noted when considering a French language film] With Un Prophet, English speaking audiences will still go to see it because of its quality, despite the use of captions.
• How do we meet the brief of making amazing theatre?
• Investment in a piece so that it has the time to develop into being as good a piece as it can be.
• Using audio description, signing and so on are artistic considerations that need to be addressed creatively (money is not always the issue).
• Is the attempt to communicate – to speak – getting in the way of making theatre?
• Working with Graeae [it was noted from experience] could be frustrating when working with a number of specialist support assistants in the same small space as [one’s] fellow actors.
• One research panel asked [of a theatre maker when assessing their experience of making work]: did you have a remit to prove yourself or be more accessible?
• Q:
With regard to casting, is the same rigour applied in disabled contexts as it is in the mainstream?
• A:
It’s such a new area – people are so afraid of saying the wrong thing.
• There was a situation in one play when a deaf actor was cast who wasn’t up to the job (which she subsequently acknowledged and the role was recast with a more skilled hearing actor).
• There is a dilemma though: if deaf actors aren’t cast then how well they develop and improve, but where are the jobs?
• We [performer’s experience] can be stuck just with disability theatre – you end up caught within the same small circuit.
• With street-theatre, you can attract audiences with work on its own merit – the response is immediate.
• Whatever you say about Cast-offs, it did attract a mainstream audience.
• However, it was in the wrong way. The remit was to produce a spoof documentary but due to the poor quality of the writing etc, the result was just a piece [lacking in irony] that resembled a Channel 5 thing.
• Queer as Folk showed mainstream audiences aspects of gay life that challenged [perceptions]. Cast-offs didn’t meet expectation. It shot itself in the foot. From the start it marginalised its subject.
• Question:
How do we help to develop the quality of our product?
• Responses:
(A programming specialist’s view] Book only quality – people of quality.
• Commission work
• [Martin asked] Why do hearing audiences attend work with Deaf / disabled / and or a particular focus? [Conversely] Why do they not attend? [He is] looking for ideas.
• If you need a mainstream audience, can you cater for a deaf audience too?
• Signed songs / signing as gestural language in dance theatre can be an appealing feature of the work for mainstream audiences [as well as disabled audiences], though not necessarily – depending upon taste.
• In Israel, Nalagat produced a piece – Not by bread alone with twelve (?) disabled actors. The work, always intended for a mainstream audience, has played to good houses for two years (the work will be coming to Britain this year).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)