This is a provocation, a proposition...
If we exclude Box Office success and Critical Acclaim (from the Press) what Barometer is there for New Work?
Please post your comments below - I took inspiration from a discussion at the Royal Court this week and would love to hear some thoughts.
I think word of mouth is really important in regards to new work. This is because I think alot of people value the opinions of someone they know rather then to take the word of a critic. For instance on our course if people go and see a good piece of Theatre and then let us know how good it is (via Facebook or in Diaries)it is most likely that some of us will then go and see it. I was inspired to go and see Rust purely on the recommendation of a colleague rather than a newspaper review.
ReplyDeleteI also think people like mystery as we are so bombarded with information all the time. We are forever being told what to like and dislike by the media that sometimes people just want to make up their own minds about things. For instance at the Edinburgh Fringe if someone hands me an intriguing but ambiguous flyer, it makes me more curious to go and see it. I think the attraction behind ambiguity is that it creates buzz and this is really important for new work. If a piece of new work gets people talking and hyped up then it must be a sign of something worth watching, without having to feel like your taking the word of a jumped up critic or following a box office trend.
Jamie has had an interesting response in which he poses the question:
ReplyDeleteQ. What would you do with the "data" you collect from such a barometer and what would that data look like?
A great angle and one that is interesting. I am not sure if I have decided what other barometers there are for new work but I do also agree with Jon's comment on the word of mouth popularity of a work - this is certainly true of our MAATP group who have weekly diary sessions in order to pass along those works that "should" be seen upon our personal recommendations...
I have however been mulling over whether the true barometer are those institutions (or indeed the individuals that comprise them) that are the real barometers of new work?! Perhaps even the funding bodies....
Which leads me on to tastes and cultures...we here a lot in our discussions here on the MA with our international colleagues about the British New Writing Culture - which instantly brings up images of the Royal Court (and then Paines Plough etc etc...) which is in itself a type / a stereotype of a British theatre...
Do those people programming / reading and directing the choices of a theatre like the Royal Court's season prove to be the true barometers?! Can we be encouraged to take a risk on work if the institutions championing us have to be sure to the tune of 70K or so (for a studio production) that they can get their money back?!
Discussions with Clare Lizzimore also exposed how much a director must fight their corner in terms of design and concept, ensuring that yes the idea is strong and it "works" but also that a theatre will allow you to push, to kick against limited resources and time...
This is somewhat of a ramble, brain to fingers typing as it were with little opportunity to reflect...a topic to return to perhaps...
...and as an after thought...
ReplyDeleteSO, I am proposing that the true barometer in Britain seems to be the institutions championing this new work - who have the ability to take risk but often feel the financial pressure (especially now).
If we to collect the data - who knows how it would manifest itself and I suppose if we were to interpret and understand such data all we would do is fight with either making work that challenged and took risks but did not get as much institutional attention OR making the work that the institutions wanted and not pushing anything forwards...
I like the provocation of:
Bring something new into this world (a concept, a way of thinking, a representation that adds something NEW...)
I was reading an article by Richard Eyre earlier today and I just remembered you posting this question. He gives his opinion on the criteria on which to judge new work, if not a 'barometer'. Perhaps it's of some interest?
ReplyDelete