Tuesday 8 July 2014

Fin invited me to the In Battalions meeting last week to champion theidea that we ask ACE to ring-fence some Lottery money to supportCommunity Residencies, e.g. playwrights, actors, puppeteers, spokenword artists etc to work part-time in a school, hospital, socialservices dept, community centre etc. This is what I said....

This post is by Jonathan Petherbridge, Creative Director at London Bubble.  Jonathan is looking for feedback and ideas for a really interesting idea for future small-scale Community Theatre Residencies.

londonbubble.org.uk

twitter.com/LBubble

I suspected that this would be the least popular of the 3 conversations going on this morning, as the other rooms are offering more dramatic debates either about recent NPO funding decisions, or the fallout from past NPO decisions. But let the few of us here console ourselves with the realisation that while they debate the world as it is, we are debating the world as it might be in the future. Well, to be more accurate if the Theatre Ecology is likened to a garden they are talking about trimming a hedge or moving a shrub, while we are talking about planting some genuinely new seeds.

The majority of tax payers do not attend the theatre. If they think about theatre they think of a building - A Theatre - probably with a stage, on which actors speak another person’s words, while people sit in the dark and listen. But that is not Theatre - what it is, is one way of delivering one type of theatre. But Theatre is in essence, something that is created between people, in many places and spaces, in many forms and for many reasons.

The real enjoyable thing about theatre, and I may be divulging a secret here, is the making of it. As well know, from the time we are children, the empowering, heady and collaborative act of theatre making is addictively exciting. And underpinning this proposal is the idea that perhaps more people would support theatre if more people were involved in making it.

So the idea I am championing is that ACE is asked to ring-fence some Lottery money to support Community Residencies. To allow theatre makers to work in settings over a period of time, to encourage and support people to make theatre.

I did some research on Artists in Residents, and it was interesting to compare Playwrights residencies to other art forms. Googling, I found Resident Playwrights at the Lyric Hammersmith, with Paines Plough and at the Soho Poly - all the Residencies seemed to be with theatre buildings or existing theatre companies. Poets on the other hand have been resident in a Church, at Glastonbuury Festival, on the Great North Run and at Bristol University. Googling artists you find (and these are all taken from the first page), an Artist in Residence at Claridges, another Artists at a shopping centre, and then there’s MI6. Yes, artists James Hart Dyke spent at year painting and drawing the goings on at MI6.

But what do they do ? Well, the Bristol University Poet, a man called Andrew Jamieson, runs student workshops from 4.30 to 7 on Wednesday, offers consultations between 4.15 and 6.15 on Fridays, gives Public Readings of his work and organises showcases for other poets to present their poetry.

Could this work for Theatre Makers ? Could a theatre makers run workshops, offer consultations, show their work and arrange sharings of other work ? Well I think we have the workforce - the writers guild/theatre writers union has 2,500 members. Equity has 36,000 members and emerging from the 204 drama courses in the country are at least 1,000 graduates a year who are going to try to make theatre, somewhere. And of course there are places - 146 prisons, 223 Hospices, 3,000 libraries, 33,000 schools - and then of course there’s MI6. I came across some visionary people who are involved in running sheltered housing schemes and care homes for the elderly and who are calling for an Artist in every setting - deploying art to make meaning of life and to nurture the wellbeing of both patients and staff. That door is ajar and waiting for us to push on it.

So what are the gains ? Well employment for artists obviously, but also the long term political effect - a good news narrative for politicians to deliver and a direct connection to people who might never otherwise encounter theatre. But also, and this is what interests me most, the opportunity to create new theatre, with new theatre makers with a new aesthetic.

And what might be the blocks ? There is a training and support requirement, but the knowledge and experience is already within the sector. Then there’s money obviously - and this shouldn’t only be for ACE to solve - I think ACE should require those who are interested in partnering with a resident artist to pay a small proportion of the costs - say 10%, to demonstrate their commitment. But this could be a low cost quick win for ACE - 700 residencies at 10k each, would cost £7 million. The Grants for the Arts budget is currently £70 million a year. Think of the impact of 700 residencies. Even half that would change perceptions.

But the other block is the sector itself - are we willing to give up our secret, are we willing to suspend quibbling and whispers of “it’s not art” ? Are we able to consider - no, to allow, other - non building, non script based forms of theatre ?

This proposal invites us to broad-cast some new seeds in the garden. Some will of course die, some will be eaten by slugs. But some will flourish.

Jonathan Petherbridge, Creative Director, London Bubble.

PS Please respond with questions, challenges and/or support for this idea. Fin and I are planning to meet with ACE in September.

7 comments:

  1. Hello Jonathan and thanks for posting this really interesting idea on our new network.

    I'm a firm believer in art outside of arts buildings and in developing artists through grassroots projects and residencies, so your proposal seems very sensible. The idea that theatre makers get out in the community can only have mutually beneficial results: theatre makers get to expand their practice and meet different audiences/ collaborators; audiences/ collaborators/ participants get to interact with theatre makers and (perhaps) co-produce some works/ short interventions; and, for me, theatre gets back to its roots - on the streets - outside of theatres. The work could end up being performed back in theatres which might bring new audiences in who have taken part or just watched the projects/ workshops taking place outside.

    The £10K per residency sounds very reasonable but will inevitably result in theatre makers being frugal and innovative - again a really important part of practice. They could perhaps raise a little more through Kickstarter and similar local match funds. The residency grant would help secure these additional funds. Not sure that ACE would ring fence £7m but even an initial fund of several million would enable a great many new projects and new theatre makers to try out exciting new ways of working.

    All-in-all, this is an excellent and much needed new approach to thinking about how we develop theatre, theatre makers and audiences. A return (of sorts) to the carnivalesque...

    Please keep us informed of developments as we'd love to see how this proposal progresses.

    Cheers,
    Stephen

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've had quite a few positive comments and re-tweets on this idea. So I'm wondering if the first step might be to get everyone to post their whereabouts on a Crowdmap (as demonstrated at In Battalions). We can thereby bring together everyones names, initiatives, ideas and locations. This will be useful when Fin and I meet up with ACE. Requires a bit of learning but every good campaign requires a map.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think could work as well. I do think should be more though I'd say 15 - 20K in order to really be able to have the length of time to embed in a place. I think the 10K model tips it towards solo artists rather than companies and I'd like to also see companies doing residencies. I have a slight fear that it could become an easy way for ACE and government to think oh that solves engagement for us. So for me its yes AND.. AND lets campaign for a new category across all funding to be socially engaged or participatory. So I could apply for as much as I want and not to have to shoehorn it to combined arts or theatre or visual arts or music none of which really describe participatory/ socially /ecologically engaged practice where in my experience the art form or many art forms are there in the pocket to be responsive and adaptive and relational and collaborative with non art forms rather than leading and singular. So yes to ring fencing and yes to talking about bringing participatory practice out from the margins into its own form as well.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Totally supportive of arts getting out of galleries and theatres and opera houses etc. not clear why in this case one art-form (theatre) should have a ring-fenced part of G4A funds - perhaps more words reasoning could help me? Cant theatre practitioners/companies just make application to existing G4A if they wish to undertake residency work? I re-iterate that i am 100% supportive of the notion of theatre engaging like this (and frustrated that more have not done so) but just not understanding of the notion of ring-fencing G4A funds for theatre residencies...I'd say ring-fence if and when there is evidence that theatre practitioners and companies have been making so many applications that a special case in G4A awards is necessary?

    ReplyDelete
  5. I've seen theatre /performance work on a small scale in a lunch club with older people with dementia. It was a commissioned piece of work in partnership with Helix Arts and Skimstone Arts. Skimstone Arts worked with the older people to co-write songs. The artists took their lead from the participants. Part of the motivation for working with the artists was to explore how artistic interventions not only benefit older people but how they can influence staff to change practices and integrate learning. The project took place over a few weeks and the learning was intense and profound for all concerned. Staff involved were co-producers throughout and had mentoring from the artists so it wasn't a one-hit wonder (if you know what i mean). So often all the life and learning the artists bring disappears without trace once they've gone. For the people with dementia there were many benefits -from people singing and coming out with ideas that they hadn't voiced for a long time and there were examples of things happening outside the facilitated sessions e.g person with dementia starting to engage with other things at home and with their family.

    I think a longer term residency is key in this sort of work and in terms of connecting in to other policy agendas you might want to think about dementia friendly communities. Theatre could be a really interesting way for whole communities to engage with narratives around living longer, dementia and family responsibilities.

    I left the organisation before everything was written up but i am sure if you approached Helix Arts http://www.helixarts.com/ they would share the learning with you. Kay http://changingconversations.wordpress.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a good example Kay, thanks for sharing it. It describes well how theatre inherently works socially, and how it can impact on a range of different players in a range of different ways if we work flexbily and with our antennae up.

      Apologies that I have not yet got the Crowdmap up so we can post and tag this sort of work. It will happen, but I want to get it right,

      Delete
  6. I think this is an interesting idea and an interesting conversation! I have a few points to add into the mix after reading the proposal.

    1) I notice that the institutions you have listed are public sector. I wondered about the possibilities of residencies with community sector organisations too. They make up most of the VCS and often are run by and for the benefit of some of the most excluded in our society.
    2) Might it be possible to have a broader range of funding options available? My concern around the £10k ceiling would be that it could limit both the ambition, timescale and quality of the work. For me, this is particularly relevant in cultural value terms e.g. the assumption that because it is participatory arts it's only worth a small investment. It would be great if funding opportunities could grow with time. I wonder if this would enable residencies to be sustained and grow over the long term, like Fin's did, as in my experience it is through the depth of relationships built over time alongside an increase in theatrical competency (as a result of the residency) where some interesting and high quality artistic work could happen. Equally, if the residency can be sustained then the social outcomes so eloquently described by Kay and connecting the theatre process and product back to the real world (policy and practice) are more likely to succeed.

    Thanks for sharing this great idea. Best of luck with it.

    ReplyDelete