Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Kaite O'Reilly on July 1, 2009 at 3:47

Thanks for the excitement and inspiration, Lucy - I'm off to the NTS on Monday for the start of an attachment. I hope it has continued along the same lines in your absence! Your comment on WMC sent a thrill through me... i'm grateful we have you here.

Permalink Reply by Peter Cox MBE on June 30, 2009 at 9:14

Very good points Kaite. I think as long as NTW has a clear meachanism in place and good relationships with partners resourced to do script and writer development work then all has the chance to be well. Especially in the first couple of years when the task of generating ground breaking productions will be immense. I script read at the Royal Court many years ago and recognise much of what you say.

Perhaps a future plan could include a project partnership to specifically generate new submissions from a target group - such as young writers across Wales. Maybe that could turn into a festival of young writers' work with varying degress of presentation of script from script in hand to production.

Perhaps a small rep' style group of actors could present four or five works in rotation.

Permalink Reply by Tim Price on July 1, 2009 at 0:37

I think there are lots of things to celebrate in this thread, from John quivering in the corner as I circle the ring arms aloft, to Adele and Lucy's clarity of thought, Simon's bigger picture grasp and finally, what we've all been waiting for...Coxy's adoption of smaller, easily digestible posts as opposed to the tsunami of ideas that drown my tiny tiny mind! Hurrah for us, patently the best group on here let's start a football team.

Permalink Reply by Peter Cox MBE on July 1, 2009 at 0:40

I can supply two sweaters for goalposts! And a few ideas to kick around!

Permalink Reply by Kaite O'Reilly on July 1, 2009 at 3:37

as a viz imp, I'll pass on the footie, but supply the oranges and squash at half time

(viz imp being visually impaired) x

Permalink Reply by National Theatre Wales on July 1, 2009 at 19:55

Indeed! Now about that special commissioning fund we are setting up for writers whose first name isn't Tim...

Permalink Reply by Peter Cox MBE on July 1, 2009 at 20:30

Time to take your ball home Tim!

Permalink Reply by Simon Harris on July 2, 2009 at 4:03

Yes, this has been a really positive discussion, receiving very reassuring and constructive interventions from both John and Lucy. Lucy’s comments about the Studio - beautifully expressed - also cut to the heart of why there is so much passion around this subject. I want to refer back to that.

However, I think we forget sometimes, amid all the frustration and concern about opportunity, how far we have come since the early Eighties. In a way, writers have become a victim of their own success. When Made in Wales started, there was only a small group of playwrights. Hundreds of plays have been produced since then and there must be around eighty or more writers with careers and still engaged with theatre. The really disheartening thing is that emerging writers still struggle for meaningful support and opportunities for production are few and far between.

One previously unmentioned way forward may be to consolidate and “broadcast” this work somehow. I mean that there is a huge amount of UK theatre work in published form from the last forty years or more that is easily accessible, but it doesn’t feature many writers from Wales.

This issue has been re-visited many times and there is an assumption in some quarters that it’s because the work is rubbish. This becomes a self-perpetuating truism. There is no sense of permanence or tradition: the work isn’t very accessible, it isn’t referred back to or re-produced, there’s no sense of an ongoing commitment, there’s a perception that there are no writers and no audience, so new work isn’t commissioned or presented, this perpetuates a lack of practice and a developing of craft and the resultant plays are less well-achieved. In the end, the work never achieves critical mass, so it seems like we don’t “do writers.”

There has been the odd attempt to turn the clock back and celebrate previous achievements, but it is hard to justify doing so when current writers are desperate for commissions. Welsh publishers have had limited success and the idea of a Library of Wales type approach seems to me, at least, very “old media,” narrow and cumbersome. In light of which, the Bush example is a useful one, but I’d like to see it go a step further.

For a few years, I’ve been wondering why we don’t have anything like the Irish Playography run by the Irish Theatre Institute. It’s a searchable database of Irish writers that gives information about the writer, the play, past productions etc. Crucially, however, I think it also ought to be possible to pay a small royalty to download a PDF copy of the play to read and then be pointed in the direction of rights if it’s of further interest. Although not primarily to support existing published work, it could also be an add-on for those writers if it was sufficiently attractive…

Anyway - back to Lucy’s post about the Studio…

For me, it offers a genuinely encompassing and inspiring vision of a creative and communal space for writers. As I have implied above, writers in Wales have never felt that they “belonged” – neither here nor elsewhere. It seems to me that the NTW offers a hope for a Studio-like ethos to be enabled and, personally, I am not overly concerned whether it incorporates a Literary Department model or not. Yes, it’s worth reflecting on the role Literary Managers have played as allies to the writing community. But only last week, I spoke at length to a playwright - part of the new Antelope Group - who talked at the increasing frustration the 40-odd playwrights present at the group’s first meeting were feeling and experiencing in “development hell.” Literary managers didn’t come out of it well. If you want to read more, check it out here:

And, although this is anecdotal, I am constantly hearing horror stories at how writers have been treated. Here are some recent examples:

 Only last week, a writer told me he had been waiting over a year for a response to a play the writer had sent to a Literary Department
 Another writer only discovered that their commission had been dropped by a theatre four months after the director the writer was working with had moved on. They had only found our after ringing up to get notes on the new draft they had subsequently and poinlessly completed.
 On the back of a very successful production, a playwright was asked to submit an extended treatment of their next play for discussion, revision and approval.
 Another writer was unable to generate any relationship with a company, despite having been showcased and promoted as part of an access initiative, because of a personal, rather than professional reason.
 A commissioned writer working with a new staff member experienced being told that the commission didn’t exist. After this was disproved, the company then refused to engage with that writer again.

Okay – perhaps it’s not helpful to cite negative experiences when we’re trying to look forward with optimism. But I do think there is a widespread and increasing dissatisfaction with the way in which writers are currently being treated. Perhaps that issue is more to do with people than structures, as it is fundamentally about trust and respect. However, I am more aware than ever before of writers being asked to do considerable amounts of work in advance of any payment and when that payment is offered it is always at the minimum. Expenses are not being offered and, when they are requested, they are refused because “it would set a precedent.” Resources are limited, but why is it always the freelancer who has to offer to work for free in a room full of people on contracts?

So, although I think it is right to be sceptical about some of the forms of “play” development that have been used in the past, I don’t think we should overlook the motivating concern that Tim expressed. The key issues for me are: how will NTW genuinely engage with entry-level writers? How will it support and encourage them with structures and opportunities into the longer term? And how will writers see more productions of their work?

Both John and Tim referred to “script-reading and play development” programmes. That is not necessarily the same as “a script-reading service,” which opens the door to a prolonged engagement with writers who have no hope of seeing their work produced. It becomes an intensive and artificial way of managing rejection and I don’t think it is satisfying for either the company or the writer. Having been requested to run one at Sgript Cymru as part of our application, I subsequently ended it. However, it does seem to me that the reading of text is an unavoidable aspect of relating to writers and their work. It is not the only way, but it is the most useful and reliable way of beginning a relationship.

Outside of “the calling card” approach, however, there is a certain amount of referencing that goes on with upcoming writers being sourced in different ways, especially through other companies and networks. But I think there is nothing more valuable and exciting than discovering a writer that nobody else is thinking about or working with. For me, it happened most memorably with Tracy, Alan and Tim himself, both of whom came through the script-reading route. If I may say so, it actually takes some artistic vision and courage to champion those writers and it will not happen if people hide behind the cop-out excuse of “quality” for championing writers that other people have taken the risk with. By the way, for avoidance of doubt, this is most emphatically not my complaint about NTW!

Following on from the issue of engagement, there is the issue of production and the development of exciting, innovative writers. The best experience you can give a playwright is to do their work. Most writers are happy to acknowledge that this is an inherently collaborative activity and welcome feedback. But the fact is that there are fewer productions of original new plays than there were some years ago. Given that there are more writers competing for fewer opportunities, it is little wonder that writers feel hard-pressed and original voices seem thinner on the ground. Personally, I really do believe that writers would be excited to work in ways that have not happened before and that a shift from a “literary” theatre to a “live” theatre will have exciting benefits. But, as I mentioned in the earlier post, there will still be writers capable of dynamic and innovative work that create it on their own.

It is just an undeveloped hunch, at the moment, but I feel that the aesthetic shift away from the literary is being accompanied by an ideological shift in power as well. In practice, I do not believe it is the theatre-makers that are looking to exploit this. People just want to do their own work and get on with it at the end of the day. My feeling is that there are directors and producers within the established system that are content to see writers – after all, a generally idiosyncratic, diverse and unaligned group of people – have their wings clipped. And I understand why. It’s coercive. It’s an attempt to make writers more malleable and pliable. Also a colleague, working with writers, once said to me: “I’ve never met a grateful playwright.” There’s some truth in that, but, if you’re in this line of work for gratitude, then you’re in the wrong job. Satisfaction has to come from the intrinsic value of seeing the work prosper and grow.

Indeed, I have every confidence that John and his team have the kind of generosity of spirit, openness and creative energy to make writers feel very special. But we shouldn’t under-estimate the base they are working from. If we can have numbers 1-12 in Lucy’s list, I will be extremely happy - not least, because they involve all the components we need, but not necessarily in the way that we’ve previously had them.

Permalink Reply by Simon Harris on July 2, 2009 at 6:08

Sorry the link to the Antelope discussion seems to have disappeared. Second go:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/stage/theatreblog/2009/jul/01/anthony-cla...

Permalink Reply by Rebecca Gould on July 3, 2009 at 1:26

This is a great discussion but it’s slightly tricky, at this stage, to get your head around all the strands and say something that hasn’t been said before….so apologies if you’ve heard what I'm saying already. I’ve been reading plays for NTW and researching Welsh based playwrights, trying to come up with a comprehensive list. There are 190 on the database so far, and I’m sure I’ve missed quite a few. The variety is huge, both in terms of the theatre and performance imagined and the experience and skill of the writers. To create a policy that serves everyone would be virtually impossible even with the National Theatre England’s budget, which is probably 15 or 20 times NTW’s. Difficult choices will to have to be made and these will favour some and not others. Perhaps the key is to be clear, to try to inspire and to give as wide access as possible?
Personally, like others have said, I don’t think a script reading service is giving access, New plays, (especially by new playwrights) often get fed in at the bottom of the theatre structure, if they’re lucky they move up the board, climbing the ladders, until the hit a snake, or occasionally the finish line!
Like others here I’ve served my time as a reader.If the play I was sent was good, (in my lonely opinion), I’d try to persuade the person with the power and the purse strings to do it, they might have 6 other plays they wanted to do and no slots, so if success came, they’d have to find another director and/or a producer who was passionate about the play and desperately wanted to do it, this rarely happened.
Perhaps a less hierarchal, more creative way might be for theatre folk to champion the playwrights they want to work with along with the subjects they want to tackle and the buildings they want to perform in… Or, for writers to find directors and collaborators, through sites such as this, that excite them, so that the energy starts on the ground. Then, they can collectively lobby NTW, or respond to the NTW vision and have a go at developing their thing?
Within this I think there is still a role for NTW developing writing for the theatre in a range of ways linked to their producing role. We as the community may have a clearer picture of how this might happen when the first season is announced?

Permalink Reply by National Theatre Wales on July 3, 2009 at 7:18

One of the many great things about this thread has been the thoughtful and sensitive way in which each contributor has responded to and built upon earlier contributions. Reading the link that Simon posted to the Guardian discussion, I'm reminded that it really isn't always this way and that all too often elsewhere these discussions become entrenched and unproductive. So hurrah for the writers of Wales.

I want to spend a bunch of time over the coming weeks reflecting on this discussion, and looking at any new contributions as they emerge. An imaginative semi-consensus seems to be emerging on a lot of things. Clearly a dynamic lab approach to new theatre writing is a preferred option for many; and there is a general agreement that we need to provide a 'calling card' process where writers can let us, and each other, know about their work. There is a rightful hunger to see new writing on stage in glorious productions. Another strong theme that comes through is that writers are very ready to give and receive mentoring in writer-to-writer networks, and that this can be more helpful than a top-down approach from a theatre.

A couple of thoughts that come to my mind at this point in the discussion:

- Should a 'calling card' system for writers in fact be something that is equally accessible to all theatre artists?
- What is the best balance between investing in the R and D of projects we are genuinely hoping to produce at NTW, and supporting more open-ended try outs of work that might develop the artists involved without ending up in a production?
- What is the role of international exchange in our offer for writers?
- How can we stimulate rather than stifle the indie scene - so that groups like Dirty Protest and companies like True Fiction feel inspired by their potential relationship with NTW, and more groups are formed?
- What are the many ways that theatre form can be explored and, yes, sometimes challenged in the opportunities that we provide for writers?

And as a stimulus to pondering that last question, if you weren't at the NTW Sandpit event last night, where the Hide and Seek group introduced us to 'pervasive gaming' in a very practical way; imagine a bunch of writers, directors, actors, gamers, online designers and music promoters running around Cardiff dressed as cartoon news crews, or the very special moment when the NTW artistic director was pursued across Bute Park by a pack of Welsh theatre artists while trying to smuggle a giant polystyrene mushroom over the park wall, and you will just begin to dream of the many possibilities for exploring theatre form that await us in the months and years to come...

Permalink Reply by Gary Owen on July 3, 2009 at 7:21

To go back to the script reading thing again - I think the key is in whether it's a formal script reading service. I worked at the coal face of such a service at BBC Wales as one of a troupe of junior trainee script monkeys brought in by Pedr James when he took over the department, and it was an edifying if demoralising experience. If NTW announces a formal script reading service, this is what will happen -

1. A mountain of scripts will arrive in Castle Arcade. Many of them will already have been submitted to Sherman Cymru: and before that to Sgript Cymru: and before that to Made in Wales. Most of these will not even be later drafts of the same play - they will be word for word the same text.
2. There'll be lots of plays by people who have no interest in, connection to or concern for Wales, but who are just taking a punt.
3. Ninety-eight per cent of the scripts will just not show any promise at all.

And - because they have said they will - NTW will take these scripts. They will formally acknowledge receipt, indicating how long it will take us to respond. They will deal with the complaints when the writer feels NTW's response time isn't fast enough. They will get someone to read the script. That someone will write a report. A response letter to the writer will be drafted on the basis of that report. And then NTW will deal with all the complaints from the writers who feel the response is wrong, and because NTW is a public body, and they are a member of the public, they have a right to a response they like. And all this takes time, energy and money.

What NTW can do instead is have an informal policy. Which means they go to readings, they see script in hand performances, they take recommendations from Sherman Cymru and other theatres, they read scripts from agents, they look at scripts posted up in this group (which is the ultimate plan for it, unless I've misunderstood). And when NTW find people who have some talent, however nascent and ill-formed, they call them in, they have meetings, they help that writer along. But they don't commit themselves to reading everything in full, to acknowledging receipt, to sending defensible responses to everything, and all that palaver.

Not having a formal script reading service does not mean abandoning new writers. It means focussing the development effort on people who actually have a talent to be developed. Yes, as a public body NTW has a duty to the public: but that duty means not wasting resources on somewhat thankless activity which is being duplicated elsewhere. It means not spending your morning writing, printing, posting and filing rejection letters to twenty people who can't write, but instead spending it on a three hour meeting with the one person who can.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page