I hope that this is of interest to those who were unable to attend.
Gerard.
10:15am
Heritage talk.
Andrew Stocker, theatre historian and former Customer Liaison officer, gave a short talk on the history of the building and theatre company. The man was a veritable encyclopedia on the Theatre Royal’s history. Of note was the history of the raised ceiling to accommodate a new gallery, which led to the retracted forestage now present in the theatre. The stalls (or pit) used to be much lower than its current location.
11:30am
Presentation and debate on the Theatre Royal’s heritage.
Dick Penny began by introducing a few of the people present. Present were Sarah Smith – project coordinator, Andrzej Blonski – architect, Patrick Malahide – Old Vic board member, Paul Unwin – former Old Vic Artistic Director and Martin White.
Throughout the discussion, Dick emphasised his wish to reinstate the theatre for the 21st century. The theatre was a building. But the building itself is like a piece of theatre. It has never been a fixed entity and has gone through numerous developments as illustrated by Andrew Stoker’s talk that morning.
He wishes to make the theatre a public space, to reinvent the discourse between the performers and the audience. The space must be engaging.
Today he wants to share ideas. He emphasised the need to respect the space, to use its strengths and reinvent the space to better serve the creation of theatre.
When he first took on the role of Chair, the original intention for redevelopment was to just make the auditorium more comfortable. Now they were looking to make the space more theatrical and less ‘stiff’.
Dick invited everyone present on to the stage, to get a feel of the space from the performer’s perspective. From the stage the theatre feels far more intimate. Dick sees this intimacy as the building’s strength. Any redevelopment would have to work with the space and not against it.
When everyone returned to their seats, Dick talked about the need to gather the next generation of theatre goers. He pointed out Jude Merrill (Artistic Producer of Travelling Light) in the audience, and described her belief that children should come to the theatre from infancy.
The best theatre, he said, was reactive. Children are often the most reactive and least ‘polite’ of audience members. However, they end up sitting in the ‘cheap seats’ in the gallery, where their responses may have the least impact. Why not bring them to the front, so that their energy can filter through the audience. Mix things up.
Next Dick talked about how to make the auditorium more flexible and change its configuration. Perhaps have the front seats as benches. Allow playfulness. Lose the centre aisle.
Andrzej Blonski, the architect contracted for the Old Vic project spoke of his love for the building and the theatre’s fascinating and rich history. Doing anything with the space was a huge responsibility. He wished to unify to auditorium (eg losing the centre aisle). How do we move on? What do we learn from the theatre’s past? The building has constantly be reinvented and rejuvenated. He wished to keep that tradition alive. He does not want to keep alive the tradition of the constant threat of closure!
Mr Blonski first came to the Theatre Royal as an architecture student around the time of the developments in 1969. He has seen the building exist in many states. It is a magical space. It is tactile. You can feel and smell the space. They are piecing together the history of the building to better inform the developments.
Dick asked if anybody present was horrified that they might do more than just get more comfortable seats. Nobody responded.
Dick then discussed a plan to lose a row of seats in each of the circles, thus allowing for more leg-room. Also to lift the rake of the rear stalls and increase the seating capacity here, perhaps with benches at the front.
Dick then opened the floor to questions:
Q: Is it possible to change the entrances to the theatre, so that instead of entering from the back, audience enter the stalls from the side doors?
Q: (From a young person the the audience who I remember being quite eloquent at a previous open house meeting). Can we have a thrust stage, bringing the forestage out into the auditorium (as it was when the theatre was built) so that the action is in the middle? She sighted the RSC’s use of the Courtyard theatre as an example of the immediacy of having action in the middle of the audience.
Q: Is it possible to increase the rake of the circle's sides, and perhaps take out the box partitions?
Q: Could we use modern techniques to change the space – eg have a movable rake in the stalls?
Paul Unwin, the former BOV AD told the group that during his tenure the theatre housed around 18 shows. When developing every piece, the question arose of how to better reach the audience. For a show about the Blitz they completely converted the space, covering the stall seating with an extension of the stage. In a production of The Master Builder with Tim West, local non-professional performers sat in the audience and reacted to the events on stage. We must conceive a theatre building as a ‘Play Box’. Theatre must be visceral – mix up the audience and the actors. He gave the example of the Roses theatre in London, who use cushions on the floor at the front of the stalls much as Dick was talking about the use of benches.
The bench idea had support from members of the audience. One of whom suggested that this made the space more family friendly. Kids could sit on a parent’s lap etc.
One audience member expressed concern that the theatre company may receive bad publicity for wanting to change the space. We must be careful and tactful.
Dick agreed and reemphasised his love for the building. Patrick Malahide also endorsed this opinion. We must tap into the roots of the building.
Dick also said that with modern technology we can do anything, but we must respect the space and its history.
Andrzej Blonski, has been involved with the project to redevelop the Theatre Royal since 2001. He has been working closely with English Heritage who are supportive of his plans so far. His intention is to recover what has been lost in the auditorium using modern techniques. In some ways we are limited by the heritage of the building. We must understand this heritage. We will recover the stall side entrances. There are various possibilities for the stage – perhaps having movable tiers so that the position of the forestage can be varied depending on the production. He wish to reinforce the statements and concerns made by the people present.
Sarah Smith has been involved with the BOV since 1996. They received redevelopment funding in 2001. They would probably reduce the current capacity from 650 to around 575 to allow for greater comfort for the audience.
Dick spoke of his belief that the catastrophe of nearly closing has given the theatre the opportunity to return to first principles. To make this a place that everyone wants to play in. To have a company of value.
As we move past the industrial age, we seek to reinvent a pre-industrial space. As recorded media becomes more disposable so the live event becomes more valuable.
Paul Unwin suggested the need to reinvent the theatre’s marketing machine. Patrick Malahide agreed, and spoke of his personal need to get tech savvy and therefore respond to marketing issues in a modern way.
In response to a question regarding air circulation in the building, Andrzej Blonski again empahised his wish to recover old parts of the building. There are air ducts currently in the roof that are not in use. Installing new air conditioning could be unsightly and damaging to the fabric of the building. He would seek a solution that mixed modern technology with the existing ventilation.
One audience member suggested that whilst the theatre needed to be more comfortable, there was a danger of it becoming too comfortable, and therefore allowing the audience to be less responsive.
Patrick Malahide said that the building must not become a museum.
Dick suggested that ‘Heritage’ was being made everyday. The company must reinvent its role in the city and the wider theatre community. We are nearly back to the stage of being a working theatre company. Next month’s open house meeting would give people a chance to discuss plans for the rest of the building.
Gerard Cooke. 21/06/2008
This article can also be found on the news pages of www.equity.org.uk/bristolwestgen
