Convener: Sarah-Jane Rawlings
Participants: Shakera Louise Ahad, Natalie Querol, Mark Conway, Liam O’Driscoll, Annie Fitzmaurice, Andrea Kantor, Jane Gauntlett, Jack Klaff, Alice Mansey, Andrew Somerville, Christina Elliot, Michelle Owoo, David Luff, Li Chen
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
The conclusions that came out of this session:
• That it is very difficult to define the role of creative producer / producer - it is so different in so many different contexts and we would probably just go round and round in circles for hours. It is also not particularly useful for this discussion. However there was an interesting piece of research done by Kate Tyndall on the role of the creative producer which was available on the Arts Council website and a more extensive collection of interviews by Kate Tyndall called, ‘Alchemist of the Impossible’ which might be interesting to read in this context.
• Generally the group felt it was difficult to build the necessary relationships. Artists looking for people to help make their work happen, didn’t know where to look and ended up doing it themselves. One of the difficulties is that neither side has any money and there therefore needs to be a real belief in each other’s vision and passion for that relationship to be sustained. Everybody was aware of artists looking for people to help make their work happen so it was great to have two people who were on or who had been on the Birkbeck creative producing course as they are of course emerging producers keen to find work to produce.
• So how does one find that relationship? Generally people felt it helped to have the relationship before the ideas so that the partnership is a genuine one with both sides sharing a vision for the piece of work and having a genuine connection. The idea of a networking event based on speed dating was mainly met with enthusiasm as it did enable individuals the chance just to meet and have an initial connection – from then it is their responsibility to take it further if they want to. So any speed dating type activity between producer and artist should not be about showcasing but about talking and sharing thoughts and ideas. The event does not need to be measure in actual impact (how many artists now have producers for example) as it is just a beginning. Like D&D it creates an environment for people to meet and talk, what happens from that might not happen immediately but it doesn’t mean nothing will happen. The outcomes might not be what was expected. It was also clear that an event like this needed to be set up correctly so that neither side had too much expectation from it.
• Having said this there was a feeling that a very light touch website / ning / online pinboard would be useful to profile producers who are interested in finding artists to work with and maybe the other way round too as nobody knew of anything concrete with this information. The issue with this is that unless someone is looking after it, it is in danger of becoming unused and out of date very quickly. Sarah-Jane promised to talk to ACE about the need that had been expressed and whether this was being dealt with in any way by the theatre unit. It would also be good to link with the graduating students from the Birkbeck creative producing course. Other networks such as this are: ideastap(?) and Women in Film and Theatre – although not completely what we were talking about – they may be useful to look at in terms of setting one up ourselves.
• Fuel talked about the case they were making to ACE about their efficiency. ACE give them a very small amount of regular funding for a percentage of their overheads with which they are able to support a lot of artists. Bill G is similar. Should we be lobbying for this to happen more?
• Finally, I think that everyone agreed that the relationship between a producer and an artist is a very unique one and will be different in every case. There are many different models that work. And however that relationship develops it has to be organic and if that is true it may be difficult to set up a structure to truly fix this issue, maybe only small initiatives to lend support to it.
Showing posts with label producing. Show all posts
Showing posts with label producing. Show all posts
Thursday, 4 February 2010
078 Intergenerational work – how do we make and produce it
Convener: Lynnette Moran
Participants: Niamh Mc Cann, Jonathan Petherby, Dominic Campbel, Rebecca – from mercury theatre, Mark Phoenix, Jack Klaff
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
The starting point for the conversation was a look at the number of platforms available to emerging artists…a lot of emerging is happening. However where are the platforms for artists who have been making work for 30, 40 or 50 + years?
Why is their a general expectation that the work of older artists will be retrospective as opposed to innovative, current, contemporary and culturally relevant…or does this expectation exist?
Does innovation and the theatre of the future belong to emerging artists or is this ownership shared with longer practicing artists?
How do we generate platforms, events, opportunities and funding to support this development of older artist?
It was noted through specific examples that longevity in a theatre maker’s career affords the artist a type of luxury - to refine methodologies, document work, simplify processes, choose projects carefully, condense touring etc.
However in contrast this luxurious status also defines the levels of ‘risk’ that can take place. How can an established theatre maker, normally associated with the main stage generate new experimentation, play smaller spaces, scratch and test ideas, new collaborations, forms and techniques? Where is the space for constructive risk and failure?
What are the contrasts and tensions that are derived from an older artist asking a younger artist for advice or mentoring - as opposed to a younger artist asking an older artist for mentoring or advice?
We discussed presentation, audience and frameworks.
It was noted that the first generation of experimental theatre makers, performance artists and dancer/choreographers are just reaching their 80’s now. In a sense the innovation of older artists is relatively new territory.
We also discussed the changes in structure and form applied by maturing experimental companies – and we collectively look forward to watching other companies develop over time.
How do we define ‘generation’? What is it perceived to be?
Is it age brackets such as 20 – 30, 30-40, and 40 – 50?
Or is it schools of thought – different generations of learning or types of training?
Schools of Thought V’s Age Brackets
It was decided amongst the group the term ‘intergenerational’ was not suitable to best describe the exchange that takes place between younger and older artists – however we were undecided what an alternative term could be however the group agreed they could identify the primary potential that intergenerational work offered was through ‘an exchange of language’, so perhaps this is was good starting point.
Participants: Niamh Mc Cann, Jonathan Petherby, Dominic Campbel, Rebecca – from mercury theatre, Mark Phoenix, Jack Klaff
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
The starting point for the conversation was a look at the number of platforms available to emerging artists…a lot of emerging is happening. However where are the platforms for artists who have been making work for 30, 40 or 50 + years?
Why is their a general expectation that the work of older artists will be retrospective as opposed to innovative, current, contemporary and culturally relevant…or does this expectation exist?
Does innovation and the theatre of the future belong to emerging artists or is this ownership shared with longer practicing artists?
How do we generate platforms, events, opportunities and funding to support this development of older artist?
It was noted through specific examples that longevity in a theatre maker’s career affords the artist a type of luxury - to refine methodologies, document work, simplify processes, choose projects carefully, condense touring etc.
However in contrast this luxurious status also defines the levels of ‘risk’ that can take place. How can an established theatre maker, normally associated with the main stage generate new experimentation, play smaller spaces, scratch and test ideas, new collaborations, forms and techniques? Where is the space for constructive risk and failure?
What are the contrasts and tensions that are derived from an older artist asking a younger artist for advice or mentoring - as opposed to a younger artist asking an older artist for mentoring or advice?
We discussed presentation, audience and frameworks.
It was noted that the first generation of experimental theatre makers, performance artists and dancer/choreographers are just reaching their 80’s now. In a sense the innovation of older artists is relatively new territory.
We also discussed the changes in structure and form applied by maturing experimental companies – and we collectively look forward to watching other companies develop over time.
How do we define ‘generation’? What is it perceived to be?
Is it age brackets such as 20 – 30, 30-40, and 40 – 50?
Or is it schools of thought – different generations of learning or types of training?
Schools of Thought V’s Age Brackets
It was decided amongst the group the term ‘intergenerational’ was not suitable to best describe the exchange that takes place between younger and older artists – however we were undecided what an alternative term could be however the group agreed they could identify the primary potential that intergenerational work offered was through ‘an exchange of language’, so perhaps this is was good starting point.
077 The Sectors: Commercial v Subsidized
Convener: David Luff
Participants: About 3
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Issues discussed:
- different funding models
- sustainability of both sectors
- ticket prices
- audience figures
- marketing + outreach + audience development
RESPONSIBILITY:
- towards building upkeep
- towards “art”
- towards new audiences and the “young”
- towards society in general
- who should artists answer to?
Partnerships for funding between both sectors and the collaborations that can emerge: e.g. Kneehigh and Pugh& Rogers with Brief Encounter
Where does the Fringe fall? Is it subsidized or commercial?
• Freedom of Artistic Content - which has more freedom?
-Does the need to to adhere to Arts Council priorities restrict the amount of freedom that subsidized companies can expect to have?
- Are commercial producers “freer” in any sense in that they can produce whatever they want, or are they held back due to the need to make a profit?
- Which sector is best placed to create art for arts sake, as opposed to art governed by political objectives, or art decided by popularity?
Ticket prices:
- Should there be a compulsion on commercial producers to always have a certain amount of cheap tickets (e.g. £10) for people? Or for this sector, should market forces always work unfettered – with producers charging whatever they want.
• Fundamentally trying to work out whether creativity can flourish in the commercial sector – in a sector driven by profit? What are the necessary ingredients for creativity?
Participants: About 3
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Issues discussed:
- different funding models
- sustainability of both sectors
- ticket prices
- audience figures
- marketing + outreach + audience development
RESPONSIBILITY:
- towards building upkeep
- towards “art”
- towards new audiences and the “young”
- towards society in general
- who should artists answer to?
Partnerships for funding between both sectors and the collaborations that can emerge: e.g. Kneehigh and Pugh& Rogers with Brief Encounter
Where does the Fringe fall? Is it subsidized or commercial?
• Freedom of Artistic Content - which has more freedom?
-Does the need to to adhere to Arts Council priorities restrict the amount of freedom that subsidized companies can expect to have?
- Are commercial producers “freer” in any sense in that they can produce whatever they want, or are they held back due to the need to make a profit?
- Which sector is best placed to create art for arts sake, as opposed to art governed by political objectives, or art decided by popularity?
Ticket prices:
- Should there be a compulsion on commercial producers to always have a certain amount of cheap tickets (e.g. £10) for people? Or for this sector, should market forces always work unfettered – with producers charging whatever they want.
• Fundamentally trying to work out whether creativity can flourish in the commercial sector – in a sector driven by profit? What are the necessary ingredients for creativity?
063 Producers
Convener: Sam Howey Nunn
Participants: About 20 people- didn’t get names, sorry everyone!
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
- Why did people come to this session? Lack of producers in one place so producers came wanting to see each other. Directors looking for producers. Various artists wanting to know what producers do.
- Discussion of how collaborations are begun and sustained, with discussion about what stage producers come on board and how long they sustain. Lots of producers want to work with the same artist from project to project.
- What makes producers tick? Lots of people wanted to know why producers do what they do. Answers:
o To build new models of the way theatre can be
o To connect people and ideas and opportunities- that’s the buzz
o To make things happen
- Commercial vs. fringe vs. subsidised. Different routes and working systems in each.
- The fashionable term of the Creative Producer. General agreement that this term undermines the validity of the Producer in general and their inherent creative role. An Administrative Producer from a subsidised theatre company (building based) pointed out that her role was very creative.
- Discussion of more independent producing and good models. Akram Khan and Farouq Chaudry. Akram is the artist, Farouq the innovator. Theirs is a respected model of collaboration- very close- Farouq with a huge creative input. But we have to remember that not all artists want this. We must have the conversations and set the boundaries early on in the collaboration.
- Discussion about when growing companies and artists take on a producer. When’s the right time? It may be later than you think. Often you need an administrator not a producer. So, useful to note what a producer does that an administrator doesn’t:
o Translator. A speaker of many languages: that of the audience, the artistic team, and venues and funders.
o Building development structures for the work. Helping to position the work and provide a framework and opportunities for its development
o Critical dialogue
o Sustaining a network around the artist and opening up opportunities for them
- Some people referred to the Producer as the first audience member/uber audience, or having the creative overview etc. This might be a controversial stance- Dramaturges often do this but are less and less visible
- Some people have experience of producers having too much power- coming into the Dress rehearsal and making changes for example, or sacking the Director at a late stage! Agreement that this would be a sign of a very bad working relationship to begin with and also more common in very commercial theatre.
- What to do about the imbalance of producers and artists needing producers? I related my experience of mentor’s advice that I should work with a venue or a very reputable company to develop as a producer, rather than staying very independent and able to take on artists at the beginning of their work. If the understanding is that for a producer to develop they need to move into a venue then no wonder there’s an imbalance. However its also very hard for a freelance producer to make a living since the bulk of the work is speculative, trying to raise money. No-one can pay London rent on that kind of work! What kind of help is there for producers to develop? Battersea Arts Centre, Stage One. Not much!
- General frustration from artists that they didn’t know where to find producers. We named:
o Stellar Network (plug for my own organisation!- we hold a large mailing list of all kinds of producers)
o Recent graduates off the Birkbeck Creative Producing strand. Also the Central strand.
o Old Vic New Voices
o Young Vic – they hold a producers list much like their directors list
- Useful to talk about how producers find artists they want to work with. Firstly producers can only usually take on artists that are already a little established, as the unpaid work involved in establishing them can be impossible to take on. Producers try and see as much stuff as possible and keep in touch with artists to see how they develop so as to come on board at the right time.
- Good examples are Fuel, Arts Admin, Your Imagination when it existed. We need more of these! But companies like that can’t start up and sustain without subsidy and they often don’t have the capacity to take on half the artists they’d like to.
- More frustration voiced at how artists get their work seen and a call for producers to get involved in seeing as many readings/workshops etc as possible. I mentioned Stellar Network and our aim to get producers, directors, artists, writers and actors in the same room on a regular basis. The responsibility is then on you to network and get yourself talking to people.
- Actions:
o Unlimited Theatre will run a panel on giving basic ‘producing’ tools to those artists and companies that need it but can’t find a producer. A stopgap. Stellar Network will run the event.
o Stellar Network will look at running a ‘Lonely Hearts’ monthly mailout detailing companies work and where it can be seen, and send out to list of Producers so that we are facilitating as much matchmaking as possible. We may also run a salon and speed networking type event that gets producers and artists together. But how successful can this be if there are always more artists than producers? Can people attached to venues help companies and artists out in their spare time (much like people work on the fringe)?
Participants: About 20 people- didn’t get names, sorry everyone!
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
- Why did people come to this session? Lack of producers in one place so producers came wanting to see each other. Directors looking for producers. Various artists wanting to know what producers do.
- Discussion of how collaborations are begun and sustained, with discussion about what stage producers come on board and how long they sustain. Lots of producers want to work with the same artist from project to project.
- What makes producers tick? Lots of people wanted to know why producers do what they do. Answers:
o To build new models of the way theatre can be
o To connect people and ideas and opportunities- that’s the buzz
o To make things happen
- Commercial vs. fringe vs. subsidised. Different routes and working systems in each.
- The fashionable term of the Creative Producer. General agreement that this term undermines the validity of the Producer in general and their inherent creative role. An Administrative Producer from a subsidised theatre company (building based) pointed out that her role was very creative.
- Discussion of more independent producing and good models. Akram Khan and Farouq Chaudry. Akram is the artist, Farouq the innovator. Theirs is a respected model of collaboration- very close- Farouq with a huge creative input. But we have to remember that not all artists want this. We must have the conversations and set the boundaries early on in the collaboration.
- Discussion about when growing companies and artists take on a producer. When’s the right time? It may be later than you think. Often you need an administrator not a producer. So, useful to note what a producer does that an administrator doesn’t:
o Translator. A speaker of many languages: that of the audience, the artistic team, and venues and funders.
o Building development structures for the work. Helping to position the work and provide a framework and opportunities for its development
o Critical dialogue
o Sustaining a network around the artist and opening up opportunities for them
- Some people referred to the Producer as the first audience member/uber audience, or having the creative overview etc. This might be a controversial stance- Dramaturges often do this but are less and less visible
- Some people have experience of producers having too much power- coming into the Dress rehearsal and making changes for example, or sacking the Director at a late stage! Agreement that this would be a sign of a very bad working relationship to begin with and also more common in very commercial theatre.
- What to do about the imbalance of producers and artists needing producers? I related my experience of mentor’s advice that I should work with a venue or a very reputable company to develop as a producer, rather than staying very independent and able to take on artists at the beginning of their work. If the understanding is that for a producer to develop they need to move into a venue then no wonder there’s an imbalance. However its also very hard for a freelance producer to make a living since the bulk of the work is speculative, trying to raise money. No-one can pay London rent on that kind of work! What kind of help is there for producers to develop? Battersea Arts Centre, Stage One. Not much!
- General frustration from artists that they didn’t know where to find producers. We named:
o Stellar Network (plug for my own organisation!- we hold a large mailing list of all kinds of producers)
o Recent graduates off the Birkbeck Creative Producing strand. Also the Central strand.
o Old Vic New Voices
o Young Vic – they hold a producers list much like their directors list
- Useful to talk about how producers find artists they want to work with. Firstly producers can only usually take on artists that are already a little established, as the unpaid work involved in establishing them can be impossible to take on. Producers try and see as much stuff as possible and keep in touch with artists to see how they develop so as to come on board at the right time.
- Good examples are Fuel, Arts Admin, Your Imagination when it existed. We need more of these! But companies like that can’t start up and sustain without subsidy and they often don’t have the capacity to take on half the artists they’d like to.
- More frustration voiced at how artists get their work seen and a call for producers to get involved in seeing as many readings/workshops etc as possible. I mentioned Stellar Network and our aim to get producers, directors, artists, writers and actors in the same room on a regular basis. The responsibility is then on you to network and get yourself talking to people.
- Actions:
o Unlimited Theatre will run a panel on giving basic ‘producing’ tools to those artists and companies that need it but can’t find a producer. A stopgap. Stellar Network will run the event.
o Stellar Network will look at running a ‘Lonely Hearts’ monthly mailout detailing companies work and where it can be seen, and send out to list of Producers so that we are facilitating as much matchmaking as possible. We may also run a salon and speed networking type event that gets producers and artists together. But how successful can this be if there are always more artists than producers? Can people attached to venues help companies and artists out in their spare time (much like people work on the fringe)?
056 Why is Edinburgh not impossible?
Convener: Laura Eades
Participants: Amanda Kellelen and Jennifer Lunn
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
Amanda: difficulties of taking a show with disabled people to Edinburgh.
The dream of a disabled performer doing a totally mainstream one-person show in a really established venue in Edinburgh is one I hope to see come to fruition.
Talk to East to Edinburgh and develop idea with them.
Talk to Lawrence somebody who did a really well-known show in a wheelchair about which venues are accessible and he may also have contacts.
Jennifer: Had a really good experience taking Borderline to Underbelly, got lots of amazing reviews which has really helped.
Advice: Do Pleasance or Underbelly or don’t bother (gulp!)
Spend £1200 either on flyering (James Seabright), if you want audience, or on a PR team if you want reviews
You need a video showcase
You can get into these venues, we were small fry and we got in
055 When are we gonna stop scratching and make a proper show
Convener: Laura Eades
The producers’ insight
Complaint that one can get stuck circulating in the scratching eddies and never moving to the next level. There were some producers in the room who asked why our work was not going to a full run.
People from Fuel talked about using scratches as part of a wider strategy – and that it’s easier to get grants for that early development stage.
They say it gives something to film, and that the audience understand the scratch process, and the artist is forced to make decisions which can really accelerate the creative process.
They said they have organized their own work-in-progress showings at the studio space in the Roundhouse, that not many people know about.
They invite industry people and general audience separately.
A marketing person says: You need to meet people and generate interest in advance of your scratch. You need to articulate what you do easily.
At this point, some of us realized we were truly ignorant of the producing process, need a producer, and are naively trusting in the scratch process to ‘provide’ a natural development path for new work rather than having a plan already in place. We called to the ceiling and to the ether: Where are all the roving producers? If they could call me on 07946 458699 that would be awesome.
The merits and zmerits of the scratch system as it stands
Is scratching an artist-led process or a venue-led programming tool?
It provides a level of publicity and therefore there’s also the pressure of display, which is at odds with the instruction to experiment.
We do scratch because it sounds achievable.
To move from a scratch to a show you have to work out what you want from your audience, you have to approach the nights with appropriate expectations.
It’s a bit like Britain’s Got Talent – the hope that luck, money, producing may follow from a scratch.
You can build a network.
You can use scratch as audience development – use the gigs to publicise your work (if it fits into a scratch slot).
It changes the kind of work that’s made, because you make work to fit into designated slots.
You can build up strength this way.
It feels risky but is it a bit insecure to need all this feedback? You can get stuck there because it feels safe.
The feedback and presentation mode are limited by the venue’s specifications. You can’t contextualize your work by explaining.
You can scratch somewhere and then scarper
Oh god, maybe we are stuck in the scratch circuit because we are actually frightened of a real show, because it feels bitesize and we can handle it, because it’s reinforcing to have all the feedback but ultimately disempowering, because it’s free, because we are ADDICTS
Some places that you can scratch and what people said about them:
BAC – no feedback from audience you don’t know
The Space-Isle of Dogs – Theatre of Inspirations –mainly physical theatre
Pulse Festival – great feedback from an after-show discussion
Brockley Jack – audience want to see a nice little show for not much money
Shunt Lounge – good chances of your interests chiming as 10 curators
One coming up at Lyric run by Shane Silankey who made Last Mango in Paris
Young Vic – very good useful feedback
Chinese venue in Manchester – very useful
Nightingale Theatre, Brighton – don’t produce but very structured feedback
Arch468 –audience intimidated by open discussion feedback format, but they do want to produce and develop work they like
Berlin – HAU – has 3 spaces
Berlin – Sophiensaele
Berlin – Dock II
Berlin – Tanfabrik
Scenepool at Camden People’s Theatre run by New Work Network – very good experience but have to drum up your own audience to some extent
What is a proper show?
A 3-week run, or more than just a night
Where you can get reviews
That you get paid for
Or that you don’t have to pay for
But just because you may not be paid for it doesn’t mean it’s not a proper show for everybody
It’s whatever you put on and say: This is a proper show. Pay for it. If you like it or don’t like it, it’s what I’ve chosen.
A proper show has a feedback process that’s not in the bar afterwards (where everyone’s pretending to be theatre critics) but where you adjust the show as you go along from the very truthful real feedback that you get from people’s attention shifts. That’s why you should dare to put up shows that are not yet ready, so the audience can finish them.
It creates the idea that a finished show is ‘frozen’
How is the scratch phenomenon changing our theatrical cultural landscape?
Used to be called work-in-progress and was dreamt up to put the risk back into the process – but some feel it’s risk-aversion dressed up as risk-taking: it’s a process that allows everybody to check and see things and check with the audience every step of the way. It allows venues not to take a risk and you not to take a risk with your audience not liking it.
Scratch nights have become a genre in their own right, and the audience is its own audience.
Someone tells of seeing a rehearsed reading and just liking the rough presentation, not wanting to see the whole show. Someone else was banned from using video and had to draw, and so then the audience said they didn’t want to see a video at all they just wanted drawing. These are not bad outcomes, but the medium actually alters the process and the product too
Possible solutions and alternatives
Artists teaming up to make scratches of their own kind, making their own models
Making 15-minute work for the cabaret and scratch circuit in its own right, like the open mic circuit works
Making work that uses a scratch aesthetic and playing it in working men’s clubs and old people’s homes
Putting your show on and having the courage to do that without all of the verification (this requires money and no guarantee of audience)
More venues which actually produce and develop the work they scratch rather than just scratching it for the sake of it
The ultimate aim is to put on proper shows that never stop scratching
Stop fighting against our inevitable inability to reproduce performances identically
Let’s have a load of premieres rather than scratches
Go to small drama festivals – Buxton fringe, Henley fringe
Make shows in squats
Deal drugs
Get a producer, get a producer, get a producer
044 One State Secondary School. What Would You Do?
Convener: Colin Atkinson
Participants: Various – you know who you are.
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
A helpfully unhelpful session.
To summarize, I am a producer in disguise in the middle of a state secondary school yet completely independent from the slow and unimaginative mechanics of that school.
The response I was looking for: an imaginative brainstorm around this unique position, the possibilities this provides for producing theatre and what this theatre might look like.
An absolute: it is not a case of parachuting in pieces of theatre.
The session (though more likely my experience of DD in general) mostly illuminated and questioned my position as a producer and my relationship to artists:
Thoughts: what about the producer as an artist? Creating a ‘thing’ - that which holds certain types of work. How does this fit with other artists? Are producers creating art that benefits the art of other artists – people listening, the right audience for that piece of work, the right piece of work for that audience, etc.
Or in other words, is it the model of the art/artists that dictates how/what we communicate? If it is the model, how does this impose on the piece of theatre?
If not, then the Producer is not creating theatre, but only an opportunity for others to create theatre, which doesn’t sit well.
See: ‘Producer’ Session and the criticism of the term ‘Creative Producer’. Perhaps this gives the term more meaning/credibility? Also, the difference between creating a career as a producer against creating something that stands alone – a thing, a model.
See: ‘Stories and Learning’ Session and
While not what I was looking for and mostly still cerebral soup, nevertheless, some more concrete ideas and suggestions did surface:
• Kids as a resource. Ambassadors
• Underground. Not become a teacher.
• Open space the community – build together, rather than show or reveal
• Definitely has to be local, community based
Participants: Various – you know who you are.
Summary of discussion, conclusions and/or recommendations:
A helpfully unhelpful session.
To summarize, I am a producer in disguise in the middle of a state secondary school yet completely independent from the slow and unimaginative mechanics of that school.
The response I was looking for: an imaginative brainstorm around this unique position, the possibilities this provides for producing theatre and what this theatre might look like.
An absolute: it is not a case of parachuting in pieces of theatre.
The session (though more likely my experience of DD in general) mostly illuminated and questioned my position as a producer and my relationship to artists:
Thoughts: what about the producer as an artist? Creating a ‘thing’ - that which holds certain types of work. How does this fit with other artists? Are producers creating art that benefits the art of other artists – people listening, the right audience for that piece of work, the right piece of work for that audience, etc.
Or in other words, is it the model of the art/artists that dictates how/what we communicate? If it is the model, how does this impose on the piece of theatre?
If not, then the Producer is not creating theatre, but only an opportunity for others to create theatre, which doesn’t sit well.
See: ‘Producer’ Session and the criticism of the term ‘Creative Producer’. Perhaps this gives the term more meaning/credibility? Also, the difference between creating a career as a producer against creating something that stands alone – a thing, a model.
See: ‘Stories and Learning’ Session and
While not what I was looking for and mostly still cerebral soup, nevertheless, some more concrete ideas and suggestions did surface:
• Kids as a resource. Ambassadors
• Underground. Not become a teacher.
• Open space the community – build together, rather than show or reveal
• Definitely has to be local, community based
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)